Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I often wondered if the projected cost of building the wall includes the aquisistion of land and the court battles to do so.
The so called Bush Wall contains miles of gaps to accommodate connected owners, a university, country clubs, HOAs and private ranches.
It's a delusion that the wall will prevent illegal immigrants from coming over the border. I guess the idea of "eminent domain" doesn't count if it's a country club.
The ramblings of the OP is the mantra of the sovereign citizen. It has no basis in law. We are a republic, a nation of laws. Most of them cherry-pick the parts of some laws they like and discard the parts they don't. They think contracts that they signed aren't valid, that taxes don't apply to them, though they use the facilities and infrastructure those taxes pay for, etc. etc. It's a lot like the way a child's brain functions. I don't wanna, so I'm not gonna.
Interesting... Got a heads up that Florida just passed a state law protecting littoral property owners from the uncompensated Takings that have happened throughout North Carolina. Privately owned dry sand beach property cannot be used by the public unless a specific public use easement is granted and the property owners are compensated.
"prohibiting a governmental entity from adopting or keeping in effect certain ordinances and rules based upon customary use"
"Left Wing" and "Communist" are not synonyms. That's where I was confused. Thanks.
Back to your delusion.
DICTIONARY CHALLENGE TIME
LEFT WING - the section of a political party, government or group that holds the most left or radical views.
- - - Webster's Dictionary
RIGHT WING - the section of a political party, government or group that holding the views of the Right.
- - - Webster's Dictionary
THE RIGHT - that section of a political party ... which associates itself with traditional authority or opinion and which in legislative bodies is seated traditionally to the right of the presiding officer.
- - - Webster's Dictionary
THE LEFT - that section of a political party ... which differs most from traditional authority or opinion and which in legislative bodies is seated traditionally to the left of the presiding officer.
- - - Webster's Dictionary
Is that clear?
Left = opposition to traditional authority
Right = support of traditional authority
I. From the Communist manifesto: "In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property."
II. Amendment V, US Constitution 1789
... nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
For 20 trivia points can you guess which is TRADITIONAL AUTHORITY OR OPINION and which one is OPPOSED?
I think the latter (II) represents TRADITIONAL AMERICAN OPINION (right wing) and the former (I) represents OPPOSITION.
COMMUNISM (and all related 'isms' that oppose private ownership) is LEFT WING. Always has been.
OH MY.
PLEASE PLEASE INSULT US SOME MORE!
It is high praise from one's adversary.
But you cannot pretend that communism / /socialism / / marxism is anything less than SLAVERY AND THEFT BY GOVERNMENT.
It's no surprise it is imposed by force or deception. No one willingly chooses to be a pauperized slave of the glorious collective state.
LEFTISTS aren't too happy when they're exposed.
The Truth of Glorious Socialism in one sentence: "a life of forced labor and famine under the leadership of loafers. "
- - - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago.
The ramblings of the OP is the mantra of the sovereign citizen [OXYMORON]. It has no basis in law. [APPARENTLY YOU DISREGARD THE LAW THEN] We are a republic, a nation of laws. Most of them cherry-pick the parts of some laws they like and discard the parts they don't. They think contracts that they signed aren't valid, that taxes don't apply to them, though they use the facilities and infrastructure those taxes pay for, etc. etc. It's a lot like the way a child's brain functions. I don't wanna, so I'm not gonna.
Witness the fervor of hand waving rhetoric - DO NOT CONSIDER - presume it to be DOUBLE NOT GOOD.
Winston Smith school of propaganda protection?
As stressed in the original post SOMEONE doesn't want us to realize that we can absolutely own land as private property.
In fact, despite the law repeatedly securing private property rights, "something" has allowed government to claim supremacy.
And as subsequent posts showed, that is rooted in CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED.
DO NOT BELIEVE ME.
GO READ THE LAW FOR YOURSELF.
Do something that even CONgress won't do - read the law.
Go and find ONE LAW* that trespasses creator endowed rights to life, liberty (natural and personal), private property, inherent powers, privileges and immunities (unrelated to consent).
Can you imagine what would happen if 51% WITHDREW CONSENT?
The remaining 49% are stuck with funding socialism, and all those other fun things that we're told to argue about.
I suspect that the 51% leaving will be the working class, while the 49% will be the taking class.
What would transpire as the public treasury empties -and- there are fewer consenting subjects to govern?
The republican form (NO CONNECTION WITH REPUBLIC) is still the law of the land. Check your own state constitution and statutes (not the code) for proof that private property is still protected, that inhabitants with domiciles (non-residents) do not need permission (license) to exercise their endowed rights and liberties, and that no law can accidentally impair a private right (without express consent of the governed) or trespass upon private property.
And even if the law fails to explicitly state the exceptions, there is still a remedy.
SHALL - As used in statutes, contracts, or the like, this word is generally imperative or mandatory... But it may be construed as merely permissive or directory (as equivalent to "may"), to carry out the legislative intention and in cases where no right or benefit depends on its being taken in the imperative sense, and where no public or private right is impaired by its interpretation in the other sense.
- - - Blacks Law dictionary, Sixth ed., p.1375
MAY - Word "may" usually is employed to imply permissive, optional or discretional, and not mandatory action or conduct... In construction of statutes and presumably of federal rules word "may" as opposed to "shall" is indicative of discretion or choice between two or more alternatives, but context is which word appears must be controlling factor.
- - - Blacks Law dictionary, Sixth ed., p.979
If a law states, "It shall be unlawful..." and you can show that if the law was mandatory in your case it would violate a PRIVATE RIGHT, the law can be construed to mean "It may be unlawful..." and merely optional, permissive or directory, without penalty for disobedience. That's not "cherry picking." It's the law of the land.
(This exclusion is in addition to exemptions, exclusions, and clauses based on the law not violating endowed rights and liberties of the sovereign people.)
Please note : the repeated use of SOVEREIGN CITIZEN (OXYMORON) as a retort shows a total disregard for the SUPREME COURT that ruled that AMERICANS ARE SOVEREIGNS.
That fact SCARES THE [bleep] out of the opposition.
'Cause if Americans ever choose to restore their SOVEREIGN STATUS, with all their ENDOWED Rights intact, THE GAME IS OVER.
It collapses the government, wipes out paper fortunes, demolishes the economy, unleashes civil unrest, triggers rioting by the former recipients, encourages wholesale resignation of public servants and their subsequent emigration to countries that do not extradite to the USA, and other such consequences.
The Disinformation Wing has scored a major victory in persuading “Patriots” to accept the belief that the creators of the state and federal constitutions were sovereign people and not subject citizens - and that the creators retained their sovereignty over that which they created!
This is the root of the so-called "sovereign citizens."
HOWEVER, consenting citizens who, like the Founders, have pledged their “lives, fortunes, and sacred honor,” in mutual defense of the nation’s people, from all enemies, foreign and domestic are not sovereigns, but subjects, because of MANDATORY CIVIC DUTIES. (They're public servants not public masters!)
Since involuntary servitude is forbidden, such duties must come from CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED.
The Supreme Court has held, in Butler v. Perry, 240 U.S. 328 (1916), that the Thirteenth Amendment does not prohibit "enforcement of those duties which individuals owe to the state, such as services in the army, militia, on the jury, etc."
In Selective Draft Law Cases, 245 U.S. 366 (1918), the Supreme Court ruled that the military draft was not "involuntary servitude".
The only people compelled to serve in the militia (selective service, etc) are CITIZENS.
Ergo, citizenship = submission, and 100% voluntary.
IF you were never informed that there were such things as free inhabitants / American nationals / non-citizens, you should go READ THE LAW and ask questions.
Don't stay ignorant because "they" mock and taunt those who question "voluntary" slavery.
You did absolutely nothing to demonstrate that left wing = communist. I might as well state that right wing = Nazi.
Some left wingers are communists, but most aren't. You're creating a straw man about leftists in order to try to prove some point of yours.
If you can produce evidence that LEFT WINGERS support Creator endowed rights to life, liberty (natural and personal), absolute ownership of private property, etc. I will be persuaded to reconsider.
From observation, the LEFT support ideas such as social justice, expropriation of property for the benefit of the needy, compelled labor for the benefit of another, and government management of the economy. Those ideas are contrary to the republican form, and are an assault upon absolute ownership of private property, natural and personal liberty and the freedom to exercise same.
FWIW - the NAZIs were left wing socialists that were Opposed to traditional authority in Germany. That the LEFT used deception - claiming to be RIGHT WING is par for the course.
You did absolutely nothing to demonstrate that left wing = communist. I might as well state that right wing = Nazi.
Some left wingers are communists, but most aren't. You're creating a straw man about leftists in order to try to prove some point of yours.
MORE DICTIONARY
COLLECTIVISM - the socialist principle of control by the people collectively, or the state, of all means of production or economic activity.
- - - Webster’s dictionary
COMMUNISM - the ownership of property, or means of production, distribution and supply, by the whole of a classless society, with wealth shared on the principle of “to each according to his need,” each yielding fully “according to his ability.”
- - - Webster's Dictionary.
SOCIALISM - A political and economic theory advocating collective ownership of the means of production and control of distribution. It is based upon the belief that all, while contributing to the good of the community, are equally entitled to the care and protection which the community can provide.
- - - Webster's dictionary
The REAL difference is INDIVIDUAL OWNERSHIP - or lack thereof.
Under the republican form, you absolutely own yourself, your labor, the fruits of your labor, and all that you acquire by your harmless labor - like LAND.
Under collectivism, in all its names, you do not, can not, and shall not absolutely own yourself, your labor, the fruits of that labor, nor that which you acquire by your harmless labor... especially LAND.
In short, you’re a SLAVE of the Collective State. Whether part time or full time, is immaterial. You’re a slave.
Compulsory charity of socialism = slavery
Expropriation of property for the benefit of another = slavery
Needing permission (license) from government = not a freeman
You are beholden to the STATE.
LEFT = SLAVERY = COLLECTIVISM
Correction : if already IN a glorious socialist paradise, then that is "Traditional" and thus communists are RIGHT WING.
Last edited by jetgraphics; 03-28-2018 at 11:59 AM..
>>> All state constitutions explicitly protect private property (your domicile) <<<
>>> All state constitutions explicitly protect endowed rights of those who did not surrender them via consent (non citizen inhabitants) <<<
>>> No endowed right nor liberty is subject to taxation or infringement <<<
Pennsylvania Constitution,
Article 1, Section 1. Inherent Rights of Mankind
All men are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent and indefeasible rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property and reputation, and of pursuing their own happiness.
. . .
YET
. . .
PENNSYLVANIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY
TITLE 51, PART II, CHAPTER 3
THE MILITIA
Sec. 301. Formation.
Enactment. Chapter 3 was added August 1, 1975, P.L.233, No.92, effective January 1, 1976.
§ 301. Formation.
(a) Pennsylvania militia.--The militia of this Commonwealth shall consist of:
(1) all able-bodied citizens of the United States and all other able-bodied persons who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, residing within this Commonwealth, who are at least 17 years six months of age and, except as hereinafter provided, not more than 55 years of age...
. . .
All men have rights to life and liberty - but - all citizens do not, if they're obligated to serve in the militia, train, fight and die on command.
If you've been misled by the world's greatest propaganda ministry, your best remedy is to go READ THE LAW FOR YOURSELF.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.