No, Jonathan, I am not Thomas Bonsell, but I have written professionally. I am working on a DADT repeal article now for publication.
On 12/14/10, Jonathan Ashley <[email protected]> wrote: > The article was written by: > > Thomas Bonsell is a former newspaper editor (in Oregon, New York and > Colorado) United States Air Force cryptanalyst and National Security > Agency intelligence agent. He became one of American journalism's > leading constitutional experts through years of study at Georgetown > University Graduate School of Government in Washington, D.C., and tries > (without much success) to be patient with people who argue endlessly on > subjects they have never studied. He is the author of "The Un-Americans: > Trashing of the United States Constitution in the American Press", a > critique of the mainstream media for ignorance of, or disdain for, our > constitutional principles of self-government. He left newspaper work > years ago, disgusted at the direction the Fourth Estate ~ under the > mismanagement of ineffectual, out-of-touch, can't-do executives ~ was > taking away from honest responsible journalism and the observation that > there was no place in the mainstream media for a progressive, or > liberal, constitutional "expert". Bonsell is an honors graduate of > Woodbury College (Los Angeles, California) with a bachelor of business > administration degree. He is profiled in Marquis Who's Who in America. > (Self-portrait, above, was handled to make author/artist appear prettier > than he actually is.) > > Is it possible this is our Tommy? > > On 12/14/2010 7:47 AM, Keith In Tampa wrote: >> <Grin>! >> When I post something, it is, Lie, Lie, False, Smear"; but when you >> post something, that is clearly fictional, (and I can provide >> empirical data to prove my point Tom, unlike the author of the >> aforementioned piece) it is the gospel, according to Tom, and >> Moonbats in general. >> Therein, lies the problem!! >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 11:49 PM, Tommy News <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> False, False, Lie, False, and Smear. >> >> On 12/13/10, Keith In Tampa <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> > I didn't get too far into this article. I started looking for >> the author, >> > to see his background and who he is affiliated with. >> > >> > Clearly, the author of this piece, maybe with the best of >> intentions, (but I >> > doubt it) has his fact wrong, and bases his theories and premise on >> > incorrect non-factual data. >> > >> > First, the Resolution Trust Fund that was set up in the late >> 1980s to deal >> > with the assets of the failed savings and loans, was eventually >> profitable, >> > and was able to liquidate somewhere close to 400 billion dollars >> of assets, >> > compared to the 124 billion that our federal government (and >> taxpayers) >> > initially loaned and utilized to bail the savings and loans out. >> > >> > Second, Ronald Reagan had nothing whatsoever to do with the >> failed savings >> > and loan crisis....If you were going to blame a President, or I >> should say >> > Presidents, which would also be incorrect, the three >> Administrations that >> > were holding watch when the precepts of the savings and loan >> debacle was >> > initiated and caused, was Franklin Roosevelt, Lyndon Johnson, >> and Jimmy >> > Carter. All three Administations were socialist in nature, and >> advocated >> > "big government". >> > >> > >> > *"Regulation Q",* under which the Federal Reserve since 1933 had >> limited the >> > interest rates banks could pay on their deposits, was extended >> to S&Ls in >> > 1966. Regulation Q was price fixing, and like most efforts to >> fix prices (* >> > See* price controls), Regulation Q caused distortions far more >> costly than >> > any benefits it may have delivered. Regulation Q created a cross >> subsidy, >> > passed from saver to home buyer, that allowed S&Ls to hold down >> their >> > interest costs and thereby continue to earn, for a few more >> years, an >> > apparently adequate interest margin on the fixed-rate mortgages >> they had >> > made ten or twenty years earlier. Thus, the extension of >> Regulation Q to >> > S&Ls was a watershed event in the S&L crisis: it perpetuated S&L >> maturity >> > mismatching for another fifteen years, until it was phased out after >> > disaster struck the industry in 1980. A remnant of Regulation Q >> > remains—banks are still barred from paying interest on business >> checking >> > accounts. >> > Disaster struck after Paul Volcker, then chairman of the Federal >> Reserve >> > Board, decided in October 1979 to restrict the growth of the >> money supply, >> > which in turn caused interest rates to skyrocket. Between June >> 1979 and >> > March 1980 short-term interest rates rose by more than six >> percentage >> > points, from 9.06 percent to 15.2 percent. In 1981 and 1982 >> combined, the >> > S&L industry collectively reported almost $9 billion in losses. >> Worse, in >> > mid-1982 all S&Ls combined had a negative net worth, valuing >> their mortgages >> > on a market-value basis, of $100 billion, an amount equal to 15 >> percent of >> > the industry’s liabilities. Specific policy failures during the >> 1980s can be >> > directly attributed to Democrats, who just like their >> involvement in the >> > Community Reinvestment Act, caused the banking failures by >> forcing banks, >> > (In this case, Savings and Loans) to loan money to folks who >> could not >> > afford to pay back the loans! >> > At every financial crisis that has taken place during our >> Nation's history, >> > it always can be attributed to those individuals and entities >> who want a big >> > government, and believe that government is the solution to all >> issues and >> > problems. >> > >> > The author's whole premise is incorrect, and exactly >> backwards.....It is big >> > government involvement, and the lack of libertarian principles >> and tenets >> > that has caused all of our financial quagmires. If Tom read, >> studied and >> > understood the general principles of accounting, he would know >> this, but >> > instead, he has chosen to mimic and parrot the far left, >> socialist-elitist's >> > Marxist agenda. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Tommy News >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> > >> >> Brucie Girl Minor's Psychosis: >> >> >> >> Libertarianism: Loveably Kooky or Dangerously Crazy? >> >> >> >> Libertarians" have discovered this citadel of liberal (or >> progressive) >> >> thought recently to challenge its users on their ideology. So let's >> >> examine what the libertarians believe to challenge their ideology. >> >> >> >> :::::::: >> >> >> >> This election season put before the nation a philosophy that many >> >> Americans gobbled up without questioning. That philosophy of >> >> "libertarianism" was promoted by Texas Rep. Ron Paul as he >> sought the >> >> Republican presidential nomination. He gathered little numerical >> >> support for his philosophy but considerable zeal for what he >> espoused. >> >> But what he proposed doesn't hold up to scrutiny as a solution >> to the >> >> problems of a modern advanced industrial nation or society. >> >> >> >> The two main thrusts to libertarianism are economic freedom (i.e. >> >> deregulation) and no taxes. On other secondary matters, such as >> >> reproductive rights, flag burning as protest, separation of >> church and >> >> state, morality, censorship, assembly, association, and dying >> without >> >> government interference, some libertarians may often appear to be >> >> closer to liberals than to conservatives, even if they don't >> recognize >> >> that. >> >> >> >> This article will deal wish the two main factors of libertarianism; >> >> business regulation and paying of taxes (or nonpaying) in which >> it has >> >> a ironclad attachment with far-right conservatism. If there were a >> >> modern nation operating on the libertarian philosophy it might >> be the >> >> island nation of Haiti. That nation, is controlled by a small >> group of >> >> wealthy elites, who live separated from the people and pay no >> taxes on >> >> the wealth they gained in a regulation-free economy. Haiti, in >> which >> >> the majority of the population is destitute, is the poorest >> nation in >> >> the Western Hemisphere. The United States began its history as a >> >> libertarian nation in which the federal government had limited >> power >> >> of national defense, foreign relations and a uniform monetary >> system. >> >> That was under the Articles of Confederation (1781-89) which failed >> >> badly. If libertarianism failed in a simpler 18th Century in a >> nation >> >> of less that 4 million population there is little reason to >> believe it >> >> would succeed in a nation of more than 300 million people in a >> >> complicated 21st Century. >> >> >> >> On deregulation, we have to look no further on the results of such >> >> folly. When I was in graduate school studying constitutional >> law, one >> >> professor stated that all regulations exist to counter evils >> present >> >> in the system, and when those regulations are removed the evils >> >> return. >> >> >> >> Since the rise of conservative control of our nation, commercial >> >> regulations have been repealed or ignored and the evils have come >> >> flooding back. Ronald Reagan loosened the oversight on banking >> during >> >> his disastrous reign and we got the savings-and-loan failures and >> >> scandals that the taxpayers have had to clean up. After the dust >> >> cleared from that Reagan disaster, it was estimated that the >> cost of >> >> getting past Reagan's mess was $500 billion. Anyone with money in a >> >> savings account knows about the cost of that cleanup with interest >> >> payments close to all-time lows as that $500-billion bill was being >> >> paid. Reagan proudly declared that, "Government is not the >> solution to >> >> our problems, government is the problem." He was wrong. The >> truth is >> >> that "Reaganism is not the solution to our problems, Reaganism >> is the >> >> problem." >> >> >> >> To see the folly of commercial deregulation we need not look >> past the >> >> frauds and crimes surrounding corporations as Worldcom, >> Adelphia, Tyco >> >> and Healthsouth. In each case, executives of the corporations >> looted >> >> the companies so they could live lives of kingly splendor while >> those >> >> who actually made the money for the companies lost their jobs, >> >> careers, homes and retirements. Owners of the corporations, the >> >> stockholders, lost much or all of their investments. The frauds and >> >> crimes were illustrated by million-dollar birthday parties in >> foreign >> >> lands for the CEO or $6,000 shower curtains in the CEOs home to >> >> accompany gold-plated bathroom fixtures. >> >> >> >> Now we have the subprime mortgage scandal that threatens the >> nation's >> >> financial health. In this present mess, mortgages were sold under >> >> false promises to people who couldn't afford the interest rates >> that >> >> would come years later. The sellers then packaged the mortgages to >> >> unload on the financial market and pocket millions for themselves >> >> while their victims lost homes, credit ratings and reputation. >> >> Financial institutions that wound up holding those unsustainable >> >> mortgages were threatened with bankruptcy. Former Federal Reserve >> >> chairman Alan Greenspan ignored the looming crisis with the >> statement >> >> that bankers didn't need oversight because they would do nothing to >> >> harm the reputation of their industry. He was wrong. >> >> >> >> The petroleum industry is now giving us a picture of what could >> happen >> >> when an important segment of commerce runs wild and does as it >> >> pleases. While it has apparently broken no laws or regulations, the >> >> industry is using speculation on the world petroleum market to >> enhance >> >> its already record profits at the expense of everything else. >> Family >> >> budgets are busted over the cost of gasoline or heating oil, >> shipping >> >> of goods is too expensive for many truckers to make a living, food >> >> prices that depend on that trucking are skyrocketing just as >> >> everything else that must be moved to market. >> >> >> >> For the wonderful world of commercial deregulation and tax >> freedom we >> >> have to look no further than the success of Enron, the giant Texas >> >> energy-trading company that collapsed amid scandal and crime. Enron >> >> had managed to free itself from regulations and taxes through close >> >> affiliation to many politicians, contributing to their >> elections and >> >> helping draw up the energy program for the Bush administration >> as it >> >> took control of the nation in 2001. >> >> >> >> Because Enron had successfully escaped taxation, it listed any >> income >> >> it had as profit thereby causing its stock price to soar. >> Executives >> >> then cashed in on the high stock price to enrich themselves while >> >> everyone else suffered. Employees lost the jobs, careers, life >> savings >> >> and retirements tied to Enron stock they were forbidden to sell. >> >> Investors lost billions. >> >> >> >> Enron was free of regulation and used that freedom to engineer >> power >> >> shortages in many markets but even the money it extorted from its >> >> victim-customers wasn't enough to prevent its collapse from the >> crimes >> >> it committed under both deregulation and tax freedom. >> >> >> >> Business regulations can rightfully be called "economic law and >> order" >> >> but those who want to control our private lives with "law and >> order" >> >> don't want lawful economic behavior, even though we give government >> >> power to confront commercial crimes through our Constitution. >> >> Deregulation basically enables the dishonest businesses to have an >> >> unfair advantage over reputable firms, that then must adopt >> dishonest >> >> practices to compete and we all lose in the process. >> >> >> >> And the destruction of unions in America may do something for the >> >> economic freedom of the aristocratic elite, it has done nothing for >> >> the working class's economic freedom, which should include the >> freedom >> >> from want. >> >> >> >> To justify their disastrous actions, conservative libertarians will >> >> ever argue that regulations either do no good or actually harm the >> >> businesses being regulated. >> >> >> >> That's total nonsense. But, if it ever it were true there is a >> simple >> >> solution that wouldn't lead to the disaster deregulation always >> seems >> >> to lead to. Article I, Section 8, paragraph 18, of the Constitution >> >> says that all laws are to be "necessary and proper" in order to be >> >> constitutionally legal. Corporations have multimillion-dollar legal >> >> departments usually devoted to courting and paying politicians >> to get >> >> the harmful deregulation they desire. Corporations could use those >> >> legal departments to argue in court that a regulation or series of >> >> regulations that do nothing are unnecessary. The overpaid >> lawyers in >> >> those legal departments could argue that a regulation that >> harms the >> >> business is not proper. Any competent judge in America would >> then void >> >> such unnecessary and improper regulation or regulations. It >> might be >> >> less expensive to go to court for a corporation rather than legally >> >> "bribe" hundreds of corrupt politicians and we would have a >> >> more-honest government in return. But corporations don't go to >> court >> >> on these issues because they know they have no, or few, compelling >> >> arguments. It might be noteworthy to observe that George W. >> Bush has >> >> been busy appointing incompetents to the federal bench. >> >> >> >> There is an idiotic notion on the "libertarian" far right that >> there >> >> is no law requiring Americans to pay taxes on their incomes. For >> >> anyone to believe that they would have to be out of touch with >> >> reality. >> >> >> >> The United States first imposed an income tax to pay for the Civil >> >> War, but that tax was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme >> Court >> >> after the war because it was a direct tax on individuals, >> forbidden by >> >> the Constitution at that time, rather than a tax on the states, >> based >> >> on their population. The states then taxed individuals, which >> made it >> >> an indirect tax from the point of view of the national government, >> >> which was constitutional. To pay for World War I, Congress >> proposed an >> >> amendment to legalize an income tax. Congress drafted and >> passed the >> >> proposal, then sent it to the states, which also passed it to >> make it >> >> part of "the supreme law of the land." >> >> >> >> But righties of libertarian persuasion want us to believe that >> >> Congress then forgot to make a law to collect that tax. The right >> >> propagandizes the point constantly, and yet Congress doesn't notice >> >> and pass an income-tax collection law? Right-wing nut cases >> have been >> >> arguing, and losing, in court for years that there is no law >> requiring >> >> them to pay an income tax, but still Congress neglects to pass >> a law >> >> to collect the taxes? Are we to believe that of the hundreds of >> laws >> >> concerning taxes that Congress has passed over the years not one >> >> requires a tax collection? That we are told to believe even >> though the >> >> Constitution says "The Congress shall have to power to lay and >> collect >> >> taxes on income ..." >> >> >> >> Please note, the amendment doesn't specifically say that Americans >> >> have to pay the income tax because that statement would be totally >> >> superfluous as the 16th is clear in stating that Congress has >> power to >> >> collect income taxes; that is the law. To impede Congress' power of >> >> collection, or subvert its intention, is a crime. The Constitution >> >> states what government has power to do, not what citizens or >> residents >> >> must do or cannot do. >> >> >> >> To counter such a clear statement of purpose, the "libertarian" >> >> right-wingers counter by saying that the Fourth Amendment prohibits >> >> government from requiring the filing of a tax return without a >> >> warrant. But the Fourth says a warrant is required only for >> "searches >> >> and seizures" and a tax return involves neither. If someone lies >> >> (perjury) about their taxes, government could send someone to >> examine >> >> all financial papers and information the reluctant taxpayer >> possesses. >> >> When that agent goes to a home or business to look over information >> >> and takes those papers for evidence, that is search and >> seizure, which >> >> requires a warrant. >> >> >> >> When the righty loses that argument, he or she resorts to the Fifth >> >> Amendment, claiming revealing income facts constitutes testifying >> >> against oneself. But the Fifth pertains to criminal trials, not >> >> collection of information. The Fifth clearly says "criminal >> cases" and >> >> filing a tax return isn't a criminal case. Most Americans are >> familiar >> >> with the phrase in the Miranda decision that "what you say can >> be used >> >> against you" in court. So what you say on a tax return can be used >> >> against you in court. Plus, if one is capable of reading >> between the >> >> lines of the Fifth, the clear intention of what James Madison was >> >> talking about becomes evident. But when a "libertarian" can't >> >> adequately read what is on the lines, reading between them is >> >> impossible. >> >> >> >> To understand the issue, one must be able to use reasoning. >> Because of >> >> the statement that "Congress shall have the power to lay and >> collect >> >> taxes on income ..." we have to understand that any law based >> on that >> >> statement must also address the power grant in the statement. >> That is, >> >> all laws must empower the collection of taxes, and don't need >> to state >> >> what a taxpayer "must" do, although most do. Congress >> established the >> >> Internal Revenue Service to collect the taxes, and that is all one >> >> needs to know. >> >> >> >> Libertarians will claim that if they have to pay taxes to >> sustain the >> >> nation in which they live they are being "punished" by the >> government, >> >> usually "punished" for the magnificent success they have >> created all >> >> by themselves. That is a strange argument for it supposes that the >> >> very nation whose government created and protects the >> conditions that >> >> allowed this magnificent success doesn't need sustenance to >> continue >> >> conditions for success. And no one ever achieved success completely >> >> alone. We all need the society around us to succeed in any way. A >> >> business needs customers with purchasing power to succeed. A writer >> >> needs publishers to print and readers to read. An actor needs >> casting >> >> directors to offer jobs, producers and directors to make the >> product, >> >> which needs audience members paying money to make it all work. >> >> Teachers needs schools and colleges to have a job, and those >> schools >> >> and colleges need students and taxpayers. Insurance salesmen need >> >> customers who need insurance. We all need each other. >> >> >> >> Then a libertarian refers to taxation as "robbery," which can >> only be >> >> interpreted as meaning that libertarian thinks the United States of >> >> America is a criminal entity, the men who wrote the >> Constitution that >> >> authorizes taxation are just a bunch of common thieves and the >> >> Constitution itself is a criminal conspiracy. But the >> Constitution is >> >> a creation of, "We the people." As James Madison, father of the >> >> Constitution said, "In the compound republic of America, the power >> >> surrendered by the people ..." That means we have given to the >> >> government the power to tax us. This is not a static one-time >> grant of >> >> power by Americans long dead, it is ongoing grant, and by living in >> >> the United States that authority continues to flow constantly from >> >> each of us. The only way to stop that flow of authority by an >> >> individual is to leave the jurisdiction of the nation receiving the >> >> power. >> >> >> >> A libertarian wrote in a recent diary that, "To a libertarian the >> >> difference between paying a person or company for a good or service >> >> one desires and having the government take money by force (against >> >> ones will) is obvious." That is nonsense, because by continuing to >> >> reside in the United States that libertarian continues to give >> >> government power to tax him. That is self taxation, not force, and >> >> staying within the jurisdiction of the taxing government is >> completely >> >> voluntary. >> >> >> >> Holding valid views of the role the Constitution plays on the >> issues >> >> of commercial regulation and taxation could get one accused by a >> >> staunch libertarian of advocating a police state or being a >> communist. >> >> >> >> There is no single definition of "patriotism." To some, waving the >> >> American flag or wearing a flag pin on a lapel is patriotism. To >> >> others patriotism is howling support for a war regardless of its >> >> justification, but that's militarism, not patriotism. Some think >> >> patriotism is sporting "I Support Our Troops" on the bumper >> sticker of >> >> a gas-guzzling SUV that keeps us dependent on imported oil. To >> others >> >> patriotism is merely the political party one belongs to or >> adherence >> >> to their political ideology; blindly following a political leader >> >> regardless of what kind of, or how many, crimes he commits; >> shouting >> >> down anyone who holds a differing opinion or expressing disdain for >> >> anything foreign, even subjecting foreign nations to US demands or >> >> control. My definition of patriotism is two-part: putting the >> needs of >> >> the nation ahead of personal interests and strict adherence to the >> >> Constitution of the United States (which would include paying >> taxes, >> >> correcting and atoning for national sins and admitting the >> nation was >> >> founded on secular principles not religious). By this >> definition, no >> >> libertarian can be a patriot. >> >> >> >> (Author's note: I grew up with libertarians and learned a valuable >> >> life lesson from a libertarian family. I became a professional >> artist >> >> in the fifth grade when David Niskanen paid me a nickel to draw a >> >> ghost for him on his Halloween greeting card being made in art >> class >> >> at Kenwood Elementary School in Bend, Oregon. David is the younger >> >> brother of William Niskanen, one of Robert McNamara's Whiz Kids >> during >> >> the Vietnam War, and who served in the Nixon administration's >> Office >> >> of Management and Budget, was a member of Ronald Reagan's >> Council of >> >> Economic Advisors from 1981 to 1985 and chairman since 1985 of the >> >> libertarian Cato Institute in Washington, DC, whose "scholars" have >> >> been furnishing crackpot economic theories to right-wing DC >> >> politicians for decades, the theories that continually lead us into >> >> economic trouble. In fairness, Bill is not a fan of the >> >> "starve-the-beast" mantra of the political right and is a >> >> balance-the-budget-before-cutting-taxes advocate, but received his >> >> doctorate degree in economics at the University of Chicago, another >> >> victim of Milton Friedman's economic teachings. The lesson I >> learned >> >> is that "them what got the nickels pay us who got the talents to do >> >> for them what they can't do for themselves." As mentioned above, >> >> nickel owners need talent possessers just as much as the >> talented need >> >> the nickel dispensers. It is also noteworthy that the Niskanen >> family, >> >> which owned the Trailways bus franchise in Oregon for many >> years, used >> >> the US court system and the economic regulations libertarians >> love to >> >> hate to sue Greyhound Bus Lines for restraint of trade and win a >> >> $23-million judgment ~ although probably settling for less in an >> >> out-of-court settlement to avoid endless appeals ~ and that >> represents >> >> a whole lot of brand-new nickels.) >> >> >> >> We can end with paraphrasing Reagan again by noting that, >> >> "Libertarianism will not be the solution to our problems, >> >> libertarianism will be the problem." >> >> >> >> More: >> >> http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=7535 >> >> >> >> On 12/13/10, Bruce Majors <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> > On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Tommy News >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Keith- >> >> >> >> >> >> Your hatred, lies, and false smear are again evident in >> these false >> >> >> statements. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > that's a lie >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> I never once said that SPLC was reputable, I simply said >> that is not a >> >> >> "Hate Organization" as you falsely stated. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > it's a tendentious and dishonest smear group and you >> circulate its >> >> > calumnies >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> I did not post any "missive full of lies." That is another >> false lie. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > You are lying. You only post government propaganda and >> disinformation, >> >> > quisling that you are >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> I am most certainly not out of step with reality, that is false >> >> >> slander, a lie, an insult, and a smear. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Another Tommy lie by the deluded brain dead step n fetchit >> Obama bot >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> I am not a "Marxist", that is yet another slanderous false >> lie, and a >> >> >> personal smear. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > You just felch Marxist ass >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> I am not a "Anti-American", that is yet another slanderous >> false lie, >> >> >> and a personal smear. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > You hate American values like individual liberty; you are a >> fascist >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> Mocking me, "making your points", and continuing to spew >> forth your >> >> >> homophobic lies and personal attacks is nothing to give >> thanks for. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Tommy hating you is not hating gays; you are a poor excuse >> for a gay or >> >> for >> >> > anything else except a crackpot >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> You, Keith, should be deeply ashamed of your hate, lies, smear, >> >> >> personal attacks, and your highly offensive vicious behavior. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> He should be ashamed he takes the time to reply to a dipshit >> like you >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> >> > For options & help see >> http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> >> > >> >> > * Visit our other community at >> >> > http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >> <http://www.politicalforum.com/><http://www.politicalforum.com/> >> >> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> >> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time. >> >> Have a great day, >> >> Tommy >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> >> For options & help see >> http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> >> >> >> * Visit our other community at >> >> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >> <http://www.politicalforum.com/><http://www.politicalforum.com/> >> >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >> > >> > -- >> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> > >> > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >> <http://www.politicalforum.com/> >> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >> >> >> -- >> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time. >> Have a great day, >> Tommy >> >> -- >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> >> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >> <http://www.politicalforum.com/> >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >> >> >> -- >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> >> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >> Find: Photo Shop. Review & Compare! >> http://click.lavabit.com/dwf9juy4qa4jguf8fd7dmbjwy161r7auug31peeg3byu5xcgt79y/ >> >> > > -- > *I reserve the right to do as I please.* > > *"There is no crueler tyranny than that which is exercised under cover > of law, and with the colors of justice ..." > - U.S. v. Jannotti, 673 F.2d 578, 614 (3d Cir. 1982) > > "If Americans wish to be free of judicial tyranny, they must at least > develop basic knowledge of the judicial role in our republican > government. The present state of affairs is a direct result of our > collective ignorance." > - Ron Paul* > > *Our courts will never be fair and just again until we force the courts > to follow their own rules. Do not allow yourself to be ruled by tyrants. > Learn how to control corrupt judges and crooked lawyers > <http://www.jurisdictionary.com?refercode=CG0004> so you can get > Justice! Learn to litigate: Buy and Study JURISDICTIONARY > <http://www.jurisdictionary.com?refercode=CG0004>. The best course > available for Pro Se and Pro Per litigants.* > > *I Refuse To Comply With The Unconstitutional Demands Of The Federal > Government* > *Read the US Constitution > <http://amgona.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7&Itemid=7#Amends>* > > > *Government is only as strong as those who allow themselves to be > governed are weak.* > > *"We have plenty of rights in this country, provided you don't get > caught exercising them." > - Terry Mitchell > > "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free it expects something that > cannot be." > - Thomas Jefferson*** > > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -- Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time. Have a great day, Tommy -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
