Dealing with personal paradox

This is something I meditate on regularly. How can I speak up on issues I find important when they seem to counter to each other?   How can I assemble a workable world view when the various parts are in conflict with each other?

 

For example, I spend most of my days trying to help Life express itself by removing distortions, imbalances, or stagnation in the flow of chi through the skeleton, skin, mind and nervous system.  It would be easy to assume, and you would be right that I am against abortion.

I am a veteran, father, Oathkeeper, watchdog, guardian and other duties.  Which explains why I am in strong support of the 2nd amendment of the formative contract that allows a government to exist among a free people.

How do these seemingly opposite positions come together in a single world view?  I’ll answer this in the comments later today.  Please feel free to chime in.

DrD

My opinions on the issues facing Missouri voters this November 2nd

Here is my opinion on the upcoming Missouri amendments and propositions.  You probably already know this, but an amendment changes the law of the land, and a propositions changes the legal code which tells government employees how to enforce the law.

Constitutional Amendment 1 (Proposed by legislation)

“Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to require the office of county assessor to be an elected position in all counties with a charter form of government, except counties with a population between 600,001-699,999?

YES I support this effort however I believe the exemption is unconstitutional so it probably will be challenged if it passes.

Constitutional Amendment 2 (Proposed by legislation) Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to require that all real property used as a homestead by Missouri citizens who are former prisoners of war and have a total service-connected disability be exempt from property taxes?

NO I do not support this measure because it creates a special status situation.  The 4th amendment of the US Constitution explains the responsibility of American government to respect the rights of private property.  When you register and pay your government according to how much property you control, this basic right turns into a government granted prev ledge.  This should read “all real property used as a homestead by Missouri citizens shall be exempt from property taxes.”

Constitutional Amendment 3Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to prevent the state, counties, and other political subdivisions from imposing any new tax, including a sales tax, on the sale or transfer of homes or any other real estate?
YES I support this because it uses the constitution to prevent government invasion into our lives and how we manage our private property.

Proposition A (Proposed by initiative petition) Earnings Taxes

“Shall Missouri law be amended to:

• repeal the authority of certain cities to use earnings taxes to fund their budgets;

• require voters in cities that currently have an earnings tax to approve continuation of such tax at the next general municipal election and at an election held every 5 years thereafter;

• require any current earnings tax that is not approved by the voters to be phased out over a period of 10 years; and,

• prohibit any city from adding a new earnings tax to fund their budget?”

YES I support this.  Government should be funded by consumption taxes collected by the merchants benefiting from the security and productivity increases allowed by the existence of government.  A free American should never be required to report his earnings to his government at any level.

Proposition B (Proposed by initiative petition) Dog Kennels & Owners – Agriculture

“Shall Missouri law be amended to:

• require large-scale dog breeding operations to provide each dog under their care with sufficient food, clean water, housing and space; necessary veterinary care; regular exercise and adequate rest between breeding cycles;

• prohibit any breeder from having more than 50 breeding dogs for the purpose of selling their puppies as pets; and

• create a misdemeanor crime of “puppy mill cruelty” for any violations?”

NO I appose this for many reasons.  The most dominant is the fact that we already have good laws regarding this industry.  This law opens the door for government interference in the private business of the people living in Missouri.

October 26, 2010 Subscribe | Unsubscribe

Senator Luann Ridgeway – Serving Clay County
Website | Contact Me | Biography | Newsroom

 

Tuesday, November 2nd General Election Day 

Statewide Ballot Measures

On Tuesday, November 2nd, Missourians across the state will head to the polls to cast their vote in this year’s general election.  You will be voting on candidates for various offices, plus you have the opportunity to vote on several proposals that, if adopted, will change our state laws or Constitution. These ballot measures cover topics ranging from taxes to regulations on agriculture. I want to provide you with a brief outline of these proposals to help you make informed choices on election day.

Constitutional Amendment 1 (Proposed by legislation)

“Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to require the office of county assessor to be an elected position in all counties with a charter form of government, except counties with a population between 600,001-699,999?

It is estimated this proposal will have no costs or savings to state or local governmental entities. (Estimate by State Auditor.) Of the two counties with a charter form of government and an appointed assessor, this proposal affects only St. Louis County (Jackson County is exempted). By 74-26%, St. Louis County voters passed a ballot proposal in August to elect their county assessor, which is also the intent of the proposed constitutional amendment.

Clay County voters currently elect our assessor.  However, there have been proposals to change Clay County to a charter form of government.  Depending on how the charter is drafted, it could remove the power of Clay County residents to elect our assessor. If you are okay with the possibility that our county assessor could be hired by other elected officials (and therefore not elected by the voters), you may choose to vote “no”. On the other hand, if you want to ensure that our county assessor is always elected and therefore directly accountable to the voters, you should vote “yes”.

Constitutional Amendment 2 (Proposed by legislation) Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to require that all real property used as a homestead by Missouri citizens who are former prisoners of war and have a total service-connected disability be exempt from property taxes?

The number of qualified former prisoners of war and the amount of each exemption are unknown, however, because the number who meet the qualifications is expected to be small, the cost to local governmental entities should be minimal. Revenue to the state blind pension fund may be reduced by $1,200. (Estimate by State Auditor.)  Most property taxes go to public schools and the estimated reduction to schools and all local governments is $186,717.

Constitutional Amendment 3Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to prevent the state, counties, and other political subdivisions from imposing any new tax, including a sales tax, on the sale or transfer of homes or any other real estate?

If approved, this proposed constitutional amendment would prohibit a new tax, including a sales tax, upon the sale or transfer of real estate.  Since these transactions are not currently taxed, the adoption of this amendment would have no impact on state or local tax revenues.  Opponents of this measure tend to be those who generally don’t like carving out more items for tax exemption, which further complicates our tax code.  Also, many people would like to see some form of “Fair Tax” imposed in Missouri, which would eliminate the state income tax and replace it with a broad-based sales tax, which may include some form of taxation on the sale of real estate.   If your views fall into either one of these categories, you may choose to vote “No”.  Supporters of this amendment want to ensure that real estate transactions continue to remain tax-free.  A “yes” vote supports this position.

Proposition A (Proposed by initiative petition) Earnings Taxes

“Shall Missouri law be amended to:

• repeal the authority of certain cities to use earnings taxes to fund their budgets;

• require voters in cities that currently have an earnings tax to approve continuation of such tax at the next general municipal election and at an election held every 5 years thereafter;

• require any current earnings tax that is not approved by the voters to be phased out over a period of 10 years; and,

• prohibit any city from adding a new earnings tax to fund their budget?”

The proposal could eliminate certain city earnings taxes. For 2010, Kansas City and the City of St. Louis budgeted earnings tax revenue of $199.2 million and $141.2 million, respectively. Reduced earnings tax deductions could increase state revenues by $4.8 million. The total cost or savings to state and local governmental entities is unknown. (Estimate by State Auditor.) St. Louis and Kansas City collect earnings tax from those who live in or work in these cities. This proposal would allow voters in these cities to decide whether to continue or phase out the earnings tax. Also, this proposal would prohibit any other cities from enacting an earnings tax.

If you support the ability of cities to tax your earnings, then you would vote “no” as this vote will continue to allow earnings taxes. If you want to eliminate the Kansas City Earnings Tax (which equals 1% of your wages) or at least want the chance to vote on whether this tax should be kept or repealed, you should vote “yes”.  Also, if you want to prevent other cities around the state (including Liberty, Smithville, Gladstone, etc.) from ever imposing an earnings tax on your income, you should also vote “yes”.

Proposition B (Proposed by initiative petition) Dog Kennels & Owners – Agriculture

“Shall Missouri law be amended to:

• require large-scale dog breeding operations to provide each dog under their care with sufficient food, clean water, housing and space; necessary veterinary care; regular exercise and adequate rest between breeding cycles;

• prohibit any breeder from having more than 50 breeding dogs for the purpose of selling their puppies as pets; and

• create a misdemeanor crime of “puppy mill cruelty” for any violations?”

It is estimated state governmental entities will incur costs of $654,768 (on-going costs of $521,356 and one-time costs of $133,412). Some local governmental entities may experience costs related to enforcement activities and savings related to reduced animal care activities. (Estimate by State Auditor.) This proposal is backed by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), which has become a very controversial organization.  It is also backed by local animal rights activists.  Interestingly, I received an e-mail from such an activist, who had this to say about the measure: “Admittedly there are both pros and cons to the intricacies of this particular proposition. It is not written as thoroughly and as perfectly as all animal welfare advocates would hope, and it IS another law in a pile of laws that have not been successfully enforced throughout our state. In addition, if all goes as planned, many mills will close due to not being willing or able to abide by the new regulations which will result in thousands of dogs being displaced and needing homes. Missouri shelters probably WILL see an increase in intake should this pass…. Are we certain that all puppy mills will be “cleaned up” and/or “wiped out” if Prop B passes? No, we’re not.”

According to the Missouri Farm Bureau (which generally supports all Missouri agriculture interests) this ballot proposal would impose “unaffordable and unnecessary regulations on reputable dog breeders. Moreover, breeders who are bad actors that do not comply with existing laws and regulations will not be affected by more regulations.” The Missourians for Animal Care Coalition (www.missourifac.com), including MFB, opposes Prop. B and supports the newly formed Alliance for Truth (www.alliancefortruth.com).

It is generally thought that this measure will pass, even though both proponents and opponents of the measure agree that this will be just another law that won’t be enforced.  Why?  Because the enforcement is mostly at the county or municipal level and, for whatever reason, current laws just aren’t enforced by many county prosecutors.  There are probably as many reasons for this as there are prosecutors (strained budgets require them to concentrate on crimes against persons is one I’ve heard).  Other opponents are concerned that this law is only the beginning of the HSUS agenda that they believe will lead to more laws preventing standard practices for dairy, beef, poultry and pork production.  This issue is very emotional as no one wants to see animals suffer.  However, both supporters and opponents of this measure seem to agree that the outcome won’t do much to stop “bad actors” involved in dog breeding or kenneling.

 

 

Contact Information
Capitol Office
State Capitol Building 

Room 221
Jefferson City, MO  65101

 

Website:
http://www.senate.mo.gov/ridgeway
Phone Number:
(toll-free) 866.875.8348  

573.751.2547

 

 

 

Help us find Sherry Jackson!

SHERRY JACKSON HAS BEEN MOVED TO A NEW PRISON AND IS NOW MISSING!

Sherry Peel Jackson has been moved again and she has not been heard from for over two weeks. She disappeared one week before Christmas and her parents nor her husband and two beautiful children have heard from her.
She is the ex-IRS agent in Aaron Russo’s video America ~ Freedom to Fascism

(http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173#) a must see film which every living man, woman and child must see. Aaron Russo gave his life to produce this documentary. Sherry, a CPA, Certified Fraud Investigator, received a 4-year sentence for telling Americans the truth, although she broke no law.

Please ask everyone to send her an encouraging note so that she knows she is not alone or forgotten. Let her know that this country is aware that she has been moved, thousands are still watching her situation closely and praying for her release. Anyone who has been in her situation cannot imagine how much good is accomplished by countless cards and letters. It does much more than just lift her spirits, which in itself is huge. It also lets the system know that she is well-known and many are watching closely to see that she is treated properly while in her federal cage, with two long years to go!
Here is her new address. Her loving husband believes she has been moved again since she has been missing for over two weeks and no one has heard a word from her. Diesel Therapy?
Sherry Peel Jackson
We believe this is her new location: SHERRY P JACKSON 59085-019 47-Black-F 08-08-2011 TALLAHASSEE FCI

Now start sending those cards and letters please!
Please take the time to see what this beautiful lady stands for and the sacrifice she, her children and her husband are paying for your family.
Sherry Peel Jackson Ex IRS Agent on Income Tax (2of2)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1r1hNjxVfU

Sherry Peel Jackson – Breaking The Invisible Shackles Of The IRS

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1658315558785013776#

Sherry Peel Jackson ~ Getting Destroyed in Prison

http://ronpaul.meetup.com/93/boards/thread/4498505

Did You Know That You Are A Slave?

http://stillaslave.blogspot.com/

Please take Action; do what is right!
WHEN THE PEOPLE FEAR THEIR GOVERNMENT THERE IS TYRANNY; WHEN THE GOVERNMENT FEARS THE PEOPLE, THERE IS LIBERTY!
~THOMAS JEFFERSON

Please pass this along to as many people as you can and do it quickly!

This must spread across the nation this week! Thank you…

Throw ALL incumbants out in 2010

by:

Michael-Edward:

800-625-4250

All I ask is that you consider the suggestion here.

The entire Congress of the United States is corrupt. And I mean both Houses and I mean both major parties..

I realize that a few Members of each House who are trustworthy, but, as a group they are absolutely the most corrupt bunch to ever disgrace our Nation.

In November of 2010 the entire House of Representatives will stand for re-election; all 435 of them. One third of the Senate, a total of 33 of them, will also stand for re-election. Vote every incumbent out.

And I mean every one of them. No matter their Party affiliation. Let’s start all over in the House of Representatives with 435 people who have absolutely no experience in running that body, with no political favors owed to anyone but their own constituents. Let’s make them understand that they work for us. They are answerable to us and they simply have to run that body with some common sense.

Two years later, in 2012, vote the next third of the incumbents in the Senate out.

We can do the same thing in 2014 and, by that time we will have put all new people in that body as well.

We, the People, have got to take this Country back and we HAVE to do it peacefully.  That’s what the Framers of our Constitution envisioned.

I am also suggesting term limits on the new bunch: 8 years for Representatives and 12 years for Senators – no exceptions. The longer they stay in office, the more power they get, and they love it and will do anything to get re-elected.

We have term-limited the President, now let’s term-limit the Legislators.

Please, if you love this Country, send this (as I have done) to absolutely everyone whose email address appears in your address book.

This thing can permeate this Country in no time. Let’s make it happen.

Don’t just delete this -please pass it on and give our Country a fighting chance.

VOTE THE POWER ABUSERS OUT……..LET’S TAKE AMERICA BACK !!!!!!!!!

Become an Active Member of http://www.AmericansRestoringAmerica.com

If you don’t know your rights, you don’t have any.

Regards,

Michael-Edward:

800-625-4250

“End The Debt – Audit The Fed” rally

November 22, 2009  12:00 Noon

End The Debt – Audit The Fedrally
38 Federal Reserve Banks.  A protest rally at every location.
In Kansas City:
Federal Reserve (across from the Liberty Memorial)
27th at Main street in Kansas City Missouri.

bring friends, signs, and a good attitude 🙂  These rallys now include many groups supporting the effort.  The KC rally coaliton includes Liberty Restoration Project, Campaign for Liberty, 912 We are Change and many Tea Party activists.

November 22 will be the 46th anniversary of the death of President John F. Kennedy.
Why do we celebrate this?  To remember the actions of a man who attempted to force our nation to follow the Constitution in regards to monetary policy.

President Kennedy signed  Executive Order #11110 authorizing the printing of United States Treasury notes to be circulated without the accumulation of debt.

This order still stands today, however is not followed due to the monopoly that the Federal Reserve Bank has on the US monetary policy.

Fast forward 46 years and there are bills in our Congress right now attempting to at least provide our nation with
oversight on that monopoly.

HR 833 would abolish the Federal Reserve board of governors entirely,
whereas HR1207 would provide for a full and complete audit on all accounting and distribution methods of the
Federal Reserve Bank and has 312 congressional sponsors.

In the US Senate a companion Audit bill, S 604 has 31 senatorial sponsors.
There is overwhelming support of bringing the Federal Reserve into some kind of boundaries
due to the recent endless debt and inflationary printing.

We plan on having a celebration of the First Amendment in support of these bills.

November 25, 2009 7 pm

The “Buchanan County Political Activist Study Group” will meet at 7 PM Wednesday November 25th at the East Hills Library.  A brief introduction regarding the mission of the group will be made plus the award winning documentary, “The Money Masters” will be shown.

The “Campaign for Liberty” and “Tea Party” groups as well as the “general public” are invited to attend these monthly study groups to share ideas and promote strategies that will assist us in electing those political leaders that will do what is best for our country.  For more information contact Larry Flinchpaugh at 676-2565.

 

 

Institutionalized Tyranny

The Character & Color of Authority By Dan Meador

Revised – November 14, 2009, in memory of the author: Dan Meador

This work documents elements of a scheme known as “Cooperative Federalism” that for the last half century has placed the American people under edict of private courts and has compromised virtually all State and Federal enforcement authority. Sections of the work demonstrate proper application of Federal drug and tax laws.

_______________

The article is posted here:

http://www.citizensforaconstitutionalrepublic.com/Pattison_Institutionalized_Tyranny_By_Dan_Meador.html#END


What do foreign governments want in return for loaning our government money?

“The Money That Is Sold Abroad Is You!”

George Orwell wrote that, “The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one’s real and one’s declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink.”


You have probably heard confusing phrases like the trade deficit, the falling dollar, the national debt, unfunded liabilities and so on, which all sound vague and actuarial and vaguely – well, “not me.”


The reality behind these accounting phrases is perfectly monstrous.


When someone – a foreigner, say – loans money to the American government, what are they getting in return?


Well, they are getting promises of interest payments, and eventual repayment of the principal.


Where does your government get this money?


The government is not a business; it does not generate profits in the free market, so where does it get the money to repay its creditors?


Do you see where this is going?


Are you beginning to understand that it is not dollars that are being sold, or bonds, or agency debt, or treasuries, or anything like that.


Where is your government going to get the money to pay off its creditors?


It is not pieces of paper or contracts or computer bits that are being sold.


There is only one thing that the government has to sell.


Governments have only one asset that they can use as collateral.


Your leaders are selling you.


When China lends $800 billion to your government, what they get in return is a guarantee that $10,000 dollars – plus interest – will be taken from your family at gunpoint and shipped overseas.


When a farmer gets a loan from a bank, he uses his livestock as collateral. It is the milk and meat his cows will produce in the future that he will use to pay off his loan.


The bank is buying a share in his cows.


You are the livestock your leaders use as collateral.


The people that you cheer for and throw parades for and drop balloons behind and donate money to are selling you to Chinese rulers, to the Japanese, to the Nigerians, to South American drug lords with accounts in the Caribbean banking centers, to Russia, to Korea, to Egypt, to Colombia, to Chile, to the Philippines, to Malaysia — and anyone else who is willing to give them a few dollars in return for the blood, sweat and toil of your future.


The flag that you praise and the anthems that you sing and the rulers that you weep and kneel before have as much loyalty to you as a plantation owner had to his slaves.


And sadly, plantation slaves had more pride than we do.


Plantation slaves did not generally praise their masters for selling them off, for auctioning off the lives, hopes, dreams and futures of their own little children.


We can understand that cattle may lick the hand of the farmer who lowers an axe to its neck, because cattle are dumb beast that cannot comprehend their real relationship with the farmer, and his imminent plans for them.


What is our excuse?


When we chant “USA” “USA” “USA,” when we cheer and bow and beg and scrape and sing and weep with joy that some new farmer now presides over the wholesale dismantling and sale of our family’s future, when we love with obsessive emptiness the leaders who laugh while they auction us off to every tin pot dictator and stockbroker the world over, what is our excuse?


Has our pride been so broken that we lunge with pathetic joy at every new silver tongued demagogue who pretends to care for us, even a tiny little bit?


In the future, our children will ask why we knelt and cheered as they were sold on the auctioneer’s block.

This video – and my life’s work – is my answer to my child.

A legal challenge to the jusidiction of Equity courts over free men

In a recent hearing where jurisdiction was effectively challenged the judge apparently got rattled and made some drastic determinations on the record that now can be used as leverage over the court and the lawyers for the rest of the case.

Our person was saying The Supreme Court says, “There has been created a fictional federal “State (of)  [name of state]  within a state.” We have numerous references to this. But he went on the record saying there was no fictional  state of Tennessee which ofcourse we can prove is not true.

From our memorandum that was also part of the record:

In Cunard S. S. Co. v. Mellon, 262 U.S. 100, 43 S.Ct. 504 (1923),The court ruled that “The term United States is a metaphor [a figure of speech]”.

According to [Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945)] [65 S.Ct. 870, 880, 89  L.Ed. 1252] The term “United States” may be used in any one of several senses. [1] It may be as a sovereign nation or the collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution. Or [2] It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States extends, and includes  “citizens of the United States”  as created   by the 14th Amendment  domiciled  in the District of Columbia, or the federal Territories and possessions , or Federal enclaves (area within a Union State) or living in one of the States of the Union or a foreign country.

The  US Constitution, Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2, states as follows:

“The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needed Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States.”

Within these areas or  in jurisdiction over 14th Amendment “citizens of the United States”  Congress  is not subject to the same constitutional limitations which restrict its power in the areas of land over which the 50 States exercise their respective sovereign authorities:

“The United States may acquire territory by conquest or by treaty, and may govern it through the exercise of the power of Congress conferred by Section 3 of Article IV of the Constitution …. In exercising this power, Congress is not subject to the same constitutional limitations, as when it is legislating for the United States. … And in general the guaranties of the Constitution, save as they are limitations upon the exercise of executive and legislative power when exerted for or over our insular possessions, extend to them only as Congress, in the exercise of its legislative power over territory belonging to the United States2, has made those guaranties applicable.”

Hooven & Allison Co. vs Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945)

The Supreme Court ruled that this case would be the last time it would address official definitions of the term “United States”. Therefore, the Hooven case must be judicially noticed by the entire American legal community

In Law the term “United States of America” refers to the several States which are “united by and under the Constitution”;  the term “United States” refers to federal possessions, property, territories, lands  areas defined in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 (1:8:17) and in Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 (4:3:2) of the Federal Constitution, that for whatever causes are not subject to the sovereignty or jurisdiction of any of the several States of the union that is the “United States of America”.

In the Cumulative Bulletin of the 63rd Congressional Session, Chapter 16, Section 2, 1913, page 177, we  find  that the terms “State” and “United States” are identified  differently when used in the context of the federal United States, or federal zone as opposed to the union of several states that is the constitutional republic, the united States of America:

Congress is the state legislature for all Territories, Possessions, and Enclaves like military bases –- an area now collectively called the federal zone.  In the year 1995 A.D., Justice Kennedy used the term “federal zone” as a household word in his concurring opinion in U.S. v. Lopez, 115 S.Ct. 1624 (1995).

“These are the territories over which Congress has exclusive jurisdiction over the landmass and the citizens that are subject to the sovereign jurisdiction of the Congress of the United States”. .

United States is construed to mean “any territory, Alaska, DC, The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Philippine Islands, American Samoa, Guam, Virgin Islands, Midway Island, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariannas, Federated States of Micronesia, Republic of Palau, Marshall Islands, Johnson Island, Baker Howland and Jarvis Islands, Kingman Reef, Palmyra Island, and Navassa Island.”

Furthermore, even though the “United States” is not a member of the “Union of States united by and under the Constitution”, it is bound by that Constitution to restrict its activities in dealing with the several States and with the Common Law Citizens of those States.  Under 1:8:17 and 4:3:2 of the Constitution for the United States of America (1787).  Congress has exclusive power to legislate and regulate the inhabitants of its federal property, territories, lands  areas defined in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 (1:8:17) and in Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 (4:3:2) of the Federal Constitution and its  “citizens”  wherever they are “resident”, even if they do inhabit one of the 50 States of the Union.

As can readily be seen from the quote above, with three separate and distinct definitions for the term “United States”, it becomes absolutely necessary to separate and define each use of this term in law.  It is equally as necessary to separate and define to whom the law applies when there are two classes of citizenship existing side-by-side, with separate and distinct rights, privileges and immunities for each.

The term “United States”, when used in its  meaning  as Congress’ exclusive jurisdiction over federal property, territories, lands  areas defined in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 (1:8:17) and in Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 (4:3:2) of the Constitution, as opposed  to  the limited jurisdiction  of  the federal government  under the  constitution over the several states of the union that  is the constitutional republic, the united States of America, under Article 1, Section 8  et all , (excepting Clause 17}, when used  in this respect as its jurisdiction over federal property, territories, lands  areas defined in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 (1:8:17) and in Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 (4:3:2,   the “United States” is foreign with respect to the several states of  the union  united by and under the Constitution. that  is the constitutional republic, the united States of America

“The idea prevails with some — indeed, it found expression in arguments at the bar — that we have in this country substantially or practically two national governments; one, to be maintained under the  Constitution, with all its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress outside and independently of that instrument, by exercising such powers as other nations of the earth are accustomed to exercise.” Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244, supra.

as opposed to the several States which are “united by and under the Constitution”

“The United States may acquire territory by conquest or by treaty, and may govern it through the exercise of the power of Congress conferred by Section 3 of Article IV of the Constitution …. In exercising this power, Congress is not subject to the same constitutional limitations, as when it is legislating for the United States…… . … And in general the guaranties of the Constitution, save as they are limitations upon the exercise of executive and legislative power when exerted for or over our insular possessions, extend to them only as Congress, in the exercise of its legislative power over territory belonging to the United States2, has made those guaranties applicable.”

Hooven & Allison Co. vs Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945)

Congress must be considered in two distinct characters. In one character as legislating for the states; in the other, as a local legislature for the district. Loughborough vs Blake, 15 U.S. (5 Wheat.) 317 – 5 L.Ed. 98 (1820)]

Title 28, United States Code, Section 297 defines the several States of the union as being “freely associated compact states” in subsection (a), and then refers to these freely associated compact states as being “countries” in subsection(b). The individual states were considered to be foreign countries to the United States and to each other

This is also true of  legal  relationship between states:

It is equally well settled that the several states of the Union are to be considered as in this respect foreign to each other,  [Hanley v. Donoghue, 116 U.S. 1, 29 L. Ed. 535] [6 S.Ct. 242, 244 (1885), emphasis added]

The United States government is a foreign corporation with respect to a state. [citing In re Merriam’s Estate, 36 N.E. 505, 141 N.Y. 479, affirmed U.S. v. Perkins, 16 S.Ct. 1073, 163 U.S. 625,

It may be  significant to note, [Instructions for Form 2555:  Foreign Earned Income]  [Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service] defines Foreign Country. –

“A foreign country is any territory under the sovereignty of a government other than the United States. “[emphasis added]

But the definition  does not include U.S. possessions or territories.

…..a “foreign country” does NOT include U.S.** possessions or territories.   U.S. possessions and territories are not “foreign” with respect to the federal zone; they are “domesticwith respect to the federal zone because they are inside the federal zone.

The U. S. Supreme Court has ruled that this foreign nation has every right to legislate for its “citizens” and to hold subject matter and in personam jurisdiction, both within (inside) and without (outside) its territorial boundaries, when legislative acts call for such effects (Cook v. Tait supra).

As a foreign nation under International law, it is perfectly legal for this nation to consider its people as “subjects” rather than as individual Sovereigns.  The protections of the State and the Federal Constitutions do not apply to these “subjects” unless there is specific statutory legislation granting specific protections (e.g., The Civil Rights Act).  The guarantees of the Constitution extend to the “United States” (i.e., the federal zone) only as Congress has made those guarantees applicable (Hooven supra).

In 26 CFR 1.1-1 (c) you will find stated, “Who is a citizen? . Every person born or naturalized in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction is a citizen.”   [emphasis added]

singular, the federal United States, of  possessions, territories, zones  areas,   not plural as the  union of the 50 states that is the constitutional  republic, the United States of America.

 

Congress did not forget the proper use of English here.

NOTE: The 13th Amendment bans involuntary servitude and slavery “within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction”. This is the manner in which amendments and legislation must be written if the law is to apply within the sovereign lands of the 50 states and to their Citizens.

But The 14th Amendment is not written thusly. The 14th Amendment embraces persons “born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof”. The phrase, “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” does not state the “plural nature” [i.e. “their“] that is required to refer to the states of the Union.

In the absence of the plural language  the courts have ruled that the law applies only to federal places or persons.

The 18th Amendment created Prohibition.

“After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.”

In Cunard S. S. Co. v. Mellon, 262 U.S. 100, 43 S.Ct. 504 (1923), the US Supreme Court held that the language Congress used in the Amendment limited its application to areas under the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of Congress – which of course is not the states of the Union.

3A Am Jur 1420, Aliens and Citizens, explains:  “A Person is born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States**, for purposes of acquiring citizenship at birth, if his birth occurs in territory over which the United States** is sovereign …”   singular, the federal United States, of  possessions, territories, zones  areas,   not plural as the  union of the 50 states that is the constitutional  republic, the United States of America.

Further, this “United States”, besides designating federal property, possessions, territories, lands  areas defined in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 (1:8:17) and in Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 (4:3:2) of the Federal Constitution, that for whatever causes are not subject to the sovereignty or jurisdiction of any of the several States of the union that is the “United States of America”, . and its “citizens” under the 14th Amendment, wherever they are “resident”, even if they do inhabit one of the 50 States of the Union, , in commerce and finance, is a corporate entity. :

The Legislative Act of February 21, 1871, Forty-first Congress, Session III, Chapter 62, page 419, chartered a Federal company entitled “United States,” a/k/a “US Inc.,” a “Commercial Agency” originally designated as “Washington, D.C.,” in accordance with the 14th Amendment, which upholds the debt of the USA and US Inc. in Section 4.

As evidenced by Title 28 USC Section 3002(5) Chapter 176.  It is clear that the United States . . . is a corporation . . . 534 FEDERAL SUPPLEMENT 724.

`It is well settled that “United States” et al is a corporation, originally incorporated February 21, 1871 under the name “District of Columbia,” 16 Stat. 419 Chapter 62.  It was reorganized June 11, 1878 with all federal territories and possessions. This corporation also copyrighted the names UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES, USA, US and AMERICA.

There is likewise equal ambiquity  in both constitutional and state statutory law, and in federal law regarding  the term used:   “State of Iowa”,

We find In federal law, Congress defines various places of exclusive federal jurisdiction as “States”. These places are not “states of the Union”. The other manner in which federal law sometimes  addresses this issue is with the phrase, “…in the United States, and subject to its jurisdiction” , as in 26 CFR 1.1-1 (c which therefore refers only to federal places.

In Article II(a) of the Uniform Detainers  Act“(a) ‘State’ shall mean a state of the United States;  the United States of America;  a territory or possession of the United States;  the District of Columbia;  the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.”

In 1940, Congress passed the “Buck Act” now found in 4 U.S.C. Sections 105-113. In Section 110(e), this Act authorized any department of the federal government to create a “Federal Area”. for imposition of the “Public Salary Tax Act of 1939.” This tax is imposed at 4 U.S.C. Section 111. The rest of the taxing law is found in the Internal Revenue Code. The Social Security Board had already created a “Federal Area” overlay. U.S.C. Title 4 is as follows:

Sec. 110(d): The term “State” includes any territory or possession of the United States.

Sec. 110(e): The term “Federal Area” means any lands or premises held or acquired by or for the use of the United states or any department, establishment, or agency of the United states; and any federal area, or any part thereof, which is located within the exterior boundaries of any State, shall be deemed to be a federal area located within such State.

Under the “Buck Act,” 4 U.S.C Secs. 105-113, the federal government has created a “Federal area” within the boundaries of the several states. This area is similar to any territory that the federal government acquires through purchase, conquest or treaty, thereby imposing federal territorial law upon the people in this “Federal area.”

The Supreme Court has determined, “There has been created a fictional federal “State (of)  xxxxxx    within a state.” See Howard v. Sinking Fund of Louisville, 344 U.S. 624, 73 S.Ct. 465, 476, 97 L.Ed. 617 (1953); Schwarts v. O’Hara TP School District, 100 A 2d. 621, 625, 375, Pa. 440

Under the Provisions of 4 U.S.C cited above, Sections 105 , the federal “State” is defined “(also known as, “The State of xxxxxxx.”)

Under state law, in the State” means within the exterior limits of the State of Iowa and includes all territory within these limits owned or ceded to the United States of America.

26 USC § 3306 Definitions – For purposes of this chapter—

(j)(1) State – The term “State” includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.

26 USC § 5891 Structured settlement factoring transactions

(c) Definitions (6) State -The term “State” includes the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and any possession of the United States.

The actual meanings of such terminology  herein discussed affecting this case  is ambiguous and unclear on its face at a minimum   which materially affect the Courts jurisdiction of the  law, In Personam, and in its own setting under proper oath and credentials to hear the case, which  must be resolved if  [[ this case is to continue.]]  [[ the Court ‘s ruling is to stand. ]]

This being the case, it will become a legal issue in this case, which Tennessee his court has jurisdiction in, Tennessee, the state of the republic or some other  federal area, region, zone,  district or jurisdiction of the federal United States, the federal UNITED STATES, INC., or its  federal area or jurisdiction, STATE OF  TENNESSEE, or  the   “federal district of the District of Columbia”, STATE OF  TENNESSEE.

Then as we said, she went to ADMINISTRATIVE OR JUDICIAL” questions  “So, is this an administrative proceeding under executive authority of a military, or maritime law jurisdiction, OR a judicial proceeding sitting as a court of law?” judge answered “Administrative” admitting his was not a judicial court as we have suspected all along.

Since the court admits it is an administrative court, As stated in our memorandum on this, Defendant  is entitled by law to an actual adjudicative hearing before such  Administrative Agency that oversees this part of the code applied in this case as may be provided for in the regulatory procedures, regulations and guidelines written by the executive  department agency to which the issues of this case are subject and/or as found  in its own regulations from the state’s administrative procedures code and that the   determinations  of such an adjudicative hearing must be made before this court administratively or procedurally has  subject matter of a case to consider.

And if in hearing of these proceedings or deliberations of the Court this is determined to be the case, Defendant respectfully gives notice to the Court request for such hearing is hereby made  for such administrative agency hearing to be held  and those determinations made before this case  proceeds further before this Court.

Defendant further questions whether the Plaintiff has exhausted its own necessary administrative remedies found in the regulatory procedures, regulations and guidelines written by the executive department agency to which the issues of this case are subject and/or as required by the state’s own   administrative procedures code before bringing the action to this Court in any capacity and if in hearing of these proceedings or deliberations of the Court it turns out  Plaintiff  has not exhausted such necessary administrative remedies, Defendant is entitled to such executive determinations before Plaintiff brings this case,   as it cannot consider the case  to grant relief until such administrative remedies have been exhausted under the state’s and the executive department’s own administrative requirements. And the Court must comply with such regulatory requirements or it is waiving its judicial immunity.

 

The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies applies where a statute provides an administrative remedy, even though the terms of the statute do not make the exhaustion of the remedy a condition of the right to resort to the courts.  (First Nat. Bank v. Board of County Comrs., 264 U.S. 450 [44 S.Ct. 385, 68 L.Ed. 784, 788-789].)

Either of these points should finally kill the case and we will raise these as the case moves on. So much more that came out of this hearing. We will go on later. If there are questions , You may reach us at 662-489-6554. Dr Weatherly

 

IMPORTANT Advisement:  The information and materials included here are only from the personal experience, knowledge or observation of the provider who is not a licensed legal professional and are not given by the provider or to be construed by the recipient as competent legal advise or assistance and the reader is encouraged to seek and maintain access to competent legal counsel to assist in all decisions concerning his or her situation. And any monetary exchanges between the parties to this email are to be understood as the non-contractual, voluntary contribution or gift of either party.

Dr. Weatherly

I am disputing the installation of the WAVE device by the Kansas City Water Department

The following is the communication line (please read from the bottom message up) as I have been attempting to protect my 4th amendment right to privacy.
If you have the WAVE installed in you house now, you probably should investigate exactly what information about your habits is being broadcast and how often.
______________________________________________________________
Lisa,
This is Dr. Drumright.  I am Mr. Ford’s chiropractor.  Please make sure he gets a copy of this message.
Thanks
Ed,
I need you to help me protect my privacy.
You see after experiencing ID theft, I have become extremely wary of the accumulation of private information in data bases that I don’t personally have control over.
The following (please read from the bottom up) is a series of emails between myself and Robert Thiemann at the Water Department.
There is no reason for the collection and storage of water use data more often than needed to calculate a bill.
The bills go out every two months, so they need to have a reading once every two months.
Any greater frequency of readings serves them no purpose while increasing the risk of this information being stolen and used for bad intent.
I look forward to your timely response to this problem.
They have told Christina they would turn off the water to my family if we don’t waive our right to privacy and quickly comply.
Sincerely,
Dr. Darrel Drumright
______________________________________________________________________
—–Original Message—–
From: Robert Thiemann [mailto:Robert_Thiemann@kcmo.org]
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 8:11 AM
To: Darrel Drumright
Subject: RE: Wave installation

I understand your concerns Dr Drumright. However, the automatic meter reading device cannot be turned off.

Rob Thiemann
Kansas City Water Services Department
816-513-0349
Fax – 513-0230
Cell – 225-0751
Inactive hide details for "Darrel Drumright" <drd@harmonyhealth.com>“Darrel Drumright” <drd@harmonyhealth.com>

        • “Darrel Drumright” <drd@harmonyhealth.com> 09/29/2009 04:33 PM

To

“Robert Thiemann” <Robert_Thiemann@kcmo.org>

cc

Subject

RE: Wave installation

Mr. Thiemann,

That is what the Army said before they lost my ID along with 25 million other veterans.

That is what Blue Cross Blue Sheild said before they lost my ID along with thousands of other providers.

You have to understand why I am sceptical about trusting a city government with so much sensitive information.

Such as what time of day I ussually take a shower, or if anyone has been home for the past three days.

Can I turn the thing on and off?

Dr Drumright

            • —–Original Message—–
              From:
              Robert Thiemann [mailto:Robert_Thiemann@kcmo.org]
              Sent:
              Monday, September 28, 2009 3:21 PM
              To:
              Darrel Drumright
              Subject:
              Re: Wave installationMr Drumright –

              I’m checked and I’m sorry but we are not going to be able to make an exception on the installation of your WAVE automatic meter reading system.

              Sincerely,

              Rob Thiemann
              Kansas City Water Services Department
              816-513-0349
              Fax – 513-0230
              Cell – 225-0751

              Inactive hide details for "Darrel Drumright" <drd@harmonyhealth.com>“Darrel Drumright” <drd@harmonyhealth.com>

                                            • “Darrel Drumright” <drd@harmonyhealth.com> 09/24/2009 09:34 AM

              To

              <robert_thiemann@kcmo.org>

              cc

              Subject

              Wave installation


              Good morning Robert,

              This is Dr Drumright.

              We discussed installing a special WAVE unit in my home at 5820 N Bedford Ave, KCMO 64151 that only broadcasts once per month.

              Thank you very much for listening to my concerns about information concentrations.

              What is the next step?

              Sincerely,

              Darrel Drumright

    • —–Original Message—–
      From:
      Robert Thiemann [mailto:Robert_Thiemann@kcmo.org]
      Sent:
      Tuesday, September 29, 2009 8:02 AM
      To:
      Darrel Drumright
      Subject:
      RE: Wave installation
      Dr Drumright –

      The city’s database is well protected and AMR technology has been proved safe in utilities around the country. The AMR meter does not control the flow of water and will not disrupt your water supply.

      Rob Thiemann
      Kansas City Water Services Department
      816-513-0349
      Fax – 513-0230
      Cell – 225-0751
      Inactive hide details for "Darrel Drumright" <drd@harmonyhealth.com>“Darrel Drumright” <drd@harmonyhealth.com>

                    • “Darrel Drumright” <drd@harmonyhealth.com>09/28/2009 06:02 PM

      To

      “Robert Thiemann” <Robert_Thiemann@kcmo.org>

      cc

      Subject

      RE: Wave installation


      Mr. Thiemann,


      Thank you for contacting me on this important issue.


      I need to know what other options there are to address my security and privacy concerns.


      Will I be able to turn the unit on and off myself to prevent the accumulation of behavior data in an unprotected database?


      Does the unit block water flow if the power goes out?


      Turning off my children’s water supply if I do not compromise my privacy rights is unacceptable.


      I look forward to working with you to create a satisfactory solution to this problem.


      Dr Drumright