http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/us-bridges-roads-built-chinese-firms-14594513

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- On Thu, 1/5/12, Sardar <sardar@...> wrote:





 



No Doctor For You: How The Federal Government Is Chasing Millions Of
Good Doctors Out Of The Medical Profession
Most Americans do not realize this, but we are on the verge of a major
doctor shortage in the United States. All over America, good doctors are
going broke. The way that our health care system is currently set up, they
simply cannot make it. These days a lot of politicians are warning us about
the dangers of "socialized medicine", but the truth is that we already have
it. About half of all health care dollars in the United States are now
spent by the federal government, and a lot of health insurance companies
base reimbursements on what the federal government does. In addition, there
are a whole host of parasites that have gotten between the doctor and the
patient these days. Everyone wants a piece of the health care pie. Health
insurance companies, pharmaceutical giants, lawyers, health care
"administrators" and government bureaucrats all make a sweet living off of
the doctor/patient relationship. It really is sickening. And now Obamacare
is going to make things much, much worse. As you will read about later in
this article, a stunning percentage of doctors say that they plan to leave
the medical profession because of Obamacare. What this means is that we are
headed for a chronic doctor shortage and there is a good chance that there
will be no doctor for you when you really need one in the years ahead.

Today, approximately 40 percent of all doctors in the United States
are 55 years of age or older. Large numbers of them are getting ready to
retire.

Even before Obamacare was passed, we were already facing a massive
shortage of doctors in the coming years. The American Association of
Medical Colleges has projected that we will experience a shortage of more
than 150,000 doctors over the next 15 years.

Unfortunately, the passage of Obamacare is going to make this crisis
even worse. A whole host of surveys have shown that a massive number of
doctors in America are headed for the exits because of the new health care
law....

*According to a Merritt Hawkins survey of 2,379 doctors for the
Physicians Foundation that was conducted in August 2010, 40 percent of all
U.S. doctors plan to "retire, seek a nonclinical job in health care, or seek
a job or business unrelated to health care" at some point over the next
three years.

*A shocking IBD/TPP Poll taken in 2010 found that 45 percent of all
U.S. doctors are considering leaving the medical profession or retiring
early as a result of Obamacare.

At the moment, there are approximately 960,000 doctors in the United
States.

So what is going to happen if a couple hundred thousand of them
suddenly leave the medical profession?

Already we were in desperate need of a lot more doctors. The
following comes from an article in the Wall Street Journal....

Health-care reform will add an estimated 32 million people to the
ranks of the insured, driving them to seek medical attention that in the
past they may have avoided due to expense. The aging population will also
create much greater demand. The number of seniors who need more medical care
is expected to soar to 72 million by 2020—nearly double today's number.

So what is going to happen if the number of doctors starts declining
rapidly?

Most Americans think of doctors as being "wealthy", but that is not
the reality of what is going on out there these days as a recent CNN article
explained....

Doctors in America are harboring an embarrassing secret: Many of
them are going broke.

This quiet reality, which is spreading nationwide, is claiming a
wide range of casualties, including family physicians, cardiologists and
oncologists.

Americans spend more on health care than anyone else in the world and
yet thousands upon thousands of doctors are going broke.

How can that be?

Well, one huge contributing factor is the mismanagement of the federal
government.

The following comes from an article in the New York Post....

Existing government programs already reimburse physicians at rates
that are often less than the actual cost of treating a patient. Estimates
suggest that on average physicians are reimbursed at roughly 78% of costs
under Medicare, and just 70% of costs under Medicaid. Physicians must either
make up for this shortfall by shifting costs to those patients with
insurance — meaning those of us with insurance pay more — or treat patients
at a loss.

So guess who has to make up the difference?

You and I.

When we go to see the doctor we get smacked with a huge bill in order
to make up for the Medicare and Medicaid patients.

Things have gotten so bad that a lot of doctors won't even see
Medicare and Medicaid patients anymore.

Just check out what some researchers found when they called around to
doctors in Illinois back in 2010. The following comes from an article in
the New York Times....

The study used a “secret shopper” technique in which researchers
posed as the parent of a sick or injured child and called 273 specialty
practices in Cook County, Ill., to schedule appointments. The callers,
working from January to May 2010, described problems that were urgent but
not emergencies, like diabetes, seizures, uncontrolled asthma, a broken bone
or severe depression. If they were asked, they said that primary care
doctors or emergency departments had referred them.

Sixty-six percent of those who mentioned Medicaid-CHIP (Children’s
Health Insurance Program) were denied appointments, compared with 11 percent
who said they had private insurance, according to an article being published
Thursday in The New England Journal of Medicine.

Today, one out of every 6 Americans is on Medicaid. Without Medicaid,
millions of children would not receive health care.

But now large numbers of doctors are rejecting patients on Medicaid
because they simply cannot afford to treat them.

And now as Obamacare is fully implemented over the next few years it
is going to make our health care mess a whole lot worse.

Obamacare is going to burden our doctors with a gigantic mountain of
new regulations and red tape. It is going to become incredibly difficult to
make a living as a doctor and the federal government is going to be pretty
much running the entire health care system.

Did you know that Obamacare is so oppressive that it is even causing
the cancellation of new hospitals?

According to the executive director of Physician Hospitals of America,
Obamacare has already forced the cancellation of at least 60 doctor-owned
hospitals that were scheduled to open.

In addition, as Obamacare is fully rolled out the wait to see a doctor
is likely to get much longer. If you urgently need to see a doctor you may
simply be out of luck.

If you doubt this, just check out what happened in Massachusetts. As
a result of Romneycare, the average wait to see a doctor in Massachusetts is
now much, much longer....

In fact, we have already seen the start of this process in
Massachusetts, where Mitt Romney’s health care reforms were nearly identical
to President Obama’s. Romney’s reforms increased the demand for health care
but did nothing to expand the supply of physicians. In fact, by cracking
down on insurance premiums, Massachusetts pushed insurers to reduce their
payments to providers, making it less worthwhile for doctors to expand their
practices. As a result, the average wait to get an appointment with a doctor
grew from 33 days to over 55 days.

Is that the kind of health care system that you want?

The more doctors that leave the system, the worse that things are
going to get.

We need a system where doctors can make a living. It is just as
simple as that.

The following is one example of a doctor that is going broke from a
recent CNN article....

Beau Donegan, senior executive with a hospital cancer center in
Newport Beach, Calif., is well aware of physicians' financial woes.

"Many are too proud to admit that they are on the verge of
bankruptcy," she said. "These physicians see no way out of the downward
spiral of reimbursement, escalating costs of treating patients and insurance
companies deciding when and how much they will pay them."

Donegan knows an oncologist "with a stellar reputation in the
community" who hasn't taken a salary from his private practice in over a
year. He owes drug companies $1.6 million, which he wasn't reimbursed for.

The following is another example from that same article....

Dr. Neil Barth is that oncologist. He has been in the top 10% of
oncologists in his region, according to U.S. News Top Doctors' ranking.
Still, he is contemplating personal bankruptcy.

That move could shutter his 31-year-old clinical practice and force
6,000 cancer patients to look for a new doctor.

Are you starting to get the picture?

There are already not enough doctors, and the number of doctors is
going to continue to decline unless something is done.

We need to fundamentally restructure the way that health care is done
in the United States. What we are doing now is not working, and Obamacare
is going to make things much worse.

Today, the average medical school student graduates with over $295,000
of student loan debt.

So if doctors can't make any money, then where is the incentive to go
into so much debt?

Something has gone very wrong.

It isn't as if we are not spending enough money on health care. Just
consider the following stats....

-What the United States spent on health care in 2009 was greater than
the entire GDP of Great Britain.

-According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, health care costs
accounted for just 9.5% of all personal consumption back in 1980. Today
they account for approximately 16.3%.

-Over the past decade, health insurance premiums have risen three
times faster than wages have in the United States.

-According to a report released in 2010, Americans spend approximately
twice as much as residents of other developed countries do on health care.

So we are definitely spending more than enough money on health care.

So where is it all going?

Well, it is going to the parasites....

-According to a report by Health Care for America Now, America's five
biggest for-profit health insurance companies ended 2009 with a combined
profit of $12.2 billion.

-The chairman of Aetna, the third largest health insurance company in
the United States, brought in a staggering $68.7 million during 2010. Ron
Williams exercised stock options that were worth approximately $50.3 million
and he raked in an additional $18.4 million in wages and other forms of
compensation. The funny thing is that he left the company and didn't even
work the whole year.

-There were more than two dozen pharmaceutical companies that made
over a billion dollars in profits each during 2008.

-According to the CDC, the percentage of Americans that say that they
have taken a prescription drug within the last month has risen to almost 50
percent.

-Lawyers are certainly doing their part to contribute to soaring
health care costs. According to one recent study, the medical liability
system in the United States added approximately $55.6 billion to the cost of
health care in 2008.

Are you starting to understand?

This gigantic mess is causing an increasing number of Americans to
seek medical care outside of the country. According to numbers released by
Deloitte Consulting, a whopping 875,000 Americans were "medical tourists" in
2010.

Our health care system is irretrievably broken. The federal
government has messed it up beyond all recognition and it is not going to
get better any time soon.

January 5th, 2012 | Tags: Chronic, Doctor, Doctors, Good Doctors,
Health, Health Care, Health Insurance, Health Insurance Companies,
Insurance, Lawyers, Medical, Medical Profession, Medicine, Pharmaceutical,
Socialized Medicine | Category: Commentary, Health

http://endoftheamericandream.com:80/archives/no-doctor-for-you-how-the-federal-g\
overnment-is-chasing-millions-of-good-doctors-out-of-the-medical-profession?utm_\
source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=no-doctor-for-you-how-the-federal-governm\
ent-is-chasing-millions-of-good-doctors-out-of-the-medical-profession



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Correspondence lead given me by a peopleb4lawyers@... which is promising. 
Suit by mail.    RJ here's a person whom you might give a voice too. She has an
interesting take.

From: Joaneheff@...
Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2012 09:40:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Wichita
To: gsgkill@...








Gary,

            Thank-you for
contacting us with your concerns.  We are not attorneys and cannot give
legal advice; however, we can give you our opinion.  The court system is
very corrupt, especially here in Kansas.  That is because Kansas is the
only state where the governor selects the judges, and our research shows they
are all in cahoots.  No, there are no honest attorneys.  We have been
operating for almost 9 years, and not one has joined us.  That is because
they are all members of the BAR, they are all in a club and loyal to them not
their clients.  You may want to consider our pro se guide under
"How to File a Federal Suit" on our website.  This shows you how to
take a case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court in three
steps.  It is all done by mail and you never see the courtroom, only
filing and printing fees are involved.  Don't worry about them dismissing
it in Kansas because it usually is, there is no justice here (yet).
But the next step is the 10th Circuit Court in Denver where other judges are
looking at it from other states and you have a chance for justice there.
We are currently involved in a mass effort to help people file lawsuits against
the government and are sending out letters this week to assist
them.  If you are interested, please provide your physical mailing
address and we can send you the information.

Best regards,

Joan Farr Heffington, C.E.O.
Association for
Honest Attorneys
7145 Blueberry Lane
Derby, Kansas 67037
Ph:
316.788.0901 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting            316.788.0901     
end_of_the_skype_highlighting
Fx: 316.788.7990
www.assocforhonestattys.com

"The answer to world peace is to eliminate arrogance."




In a message dated 1/1/2012 8:48:27 P.M. Central Standard Time,
gsgkill@... writes:

   My brother and I were down in Wichita for several weeks a month
   ago and we were tending to our 91 year old Dad. My step mother did not want to
   take care of him anymore and wanted him to go into a nursing home.
    So she exaggerated his condition and the doctor for the
   nursing home put him on Haldol and it caused him severe side
   effects.  We found out the drug was not recognized for the
   elderly not FDA approved for use on the elderly and can cause death.
   My brother had a advance health care directive put in to place
   in California in in 2003 when my Dad lived there and my
   stepmother abandoned him and moved to Wichita Kansas without him,
   taking most of his savings with her. He was 85 then and he and my brother went
   to attorney and set up two processes one for health care and one
   for financial power of attorney. At 85 our Dad got in a car accident and
   they were afraid he would get sued,  and he still had some
   of his estate left she hadn't taken, so my brother escorted Dad to Utah to
   stay with one of the stepsons and family. Later Dad moved to Wichita and my
   stepmother found the power of Attorneys and had Dad revoke to one for
   his financial 2005 but not the one for the health.   My
   brother and I were at the Nursing home there in
   Andover Victoria Falls with a copy of dads health care directive,
   trying to get him off the drug Haldol when stepmother filed emergency Ex Parte
   orders with the nursing home and prevented us
   in getting Dad off the Drug. We tried to hire an attorney but they wanted
   $20,000 to represent us, so we filed documents into the the court record Pro
Se but we could no longer stay in
   the area we ran out of funds.  We put a request in to Dads court
   appointed attorney to have the judge
   call us and he did not. So my brother sent the following attachment to the
   Kansas Attorney General Office via fax and to the court
   certified mail green card return.  They could probably care less what we
   say or do, but we have to do something.
    Jan 4th 2012 the
   court approves my stepmothers guardianship and conservator plan
   and we can not be there, we barley have stamp money. According to the plan he
   still my be on a drug that can kill him. she is putting him on welfare
   medicaid and she has hidden all assets. She probably will put him in a nursing
home
   that medicaid will pay for, if she hasn't already. The plan states
   he qualified for medicaid.  None of
   the people in this thing cares including his wife.  My
   brother and I thought Victoria Falls was a very nice home. But
   she removed him from there against her own court
   order after her order said he needed skilled care and took him home. My
   stepmother told me before she knew me as the enemy, that Victoria
   Falls wanted $4,000 a month above his medicare and she had worked a
   deal with them she would not have to pay a second month if she removed him by
   a certain date. We did not Realize at
   the time the Nursing homes resident doctor was the one who put him on Haldol.
    We have made complaints to CPS, and health Dept, and the health dept Dr.
   Moser's office was the only response we got that seem to
   care and the RN which called, told us to call the Kansas healing art board and
   make a complaint against the doctor for use of the drug Haldol on an elder
   but since she had removed him from the home they could not
   investigate the home till regulatory inspection.
    I made a video of dad the day before he went into Victoria falls and if
   he has dementia it is
   not noticeable.  So we are at a loss what to do.
   We have had advice from William Duff of www.countygrandjury.org to do a Writ
   of Mandamus and compel the court to put into the plan that they can not give
   dad a drug which could diminish his
   condition.  But there is not enough time, and I don't know how to do one
   with the right words and we can not afford to be there to argue it. Then we
   have had advice from a yahoo group I belong to, people B4 lawyers when in
   doubt sue everyone and make it cost them.  The problem is it costs us to.
    So do have any suggestions? any other avenues?  Do you think we
   have a chance in federal court? do we really have rights? Is there really such
   a thing as an honest attorney? I have only written a letter like
   this probably 25 times please look over any mistakes. I have
   read your website on Federal Courts.


   Thanks, nice website, we will join,
   Gary Stauffer
   Google Phone 316-350-7425




=

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 







           
Dear Citizen,                         December 2011


             As the rolls of the Bar Association attorneys continue
to swell, one can continue to expect more oppressive and repressive legislation
to be enacted that continue to deprive more and more Americans of their rights.

            The U.S. Senate is expecting to pass S.1867, which is the
National Defense Authorization Act. This bill gives policing power to the
Department of Defense.The military can 
                 
           1.  Indefinitely detain American citizens and lawful
resident aliens throughout the globe, including on American soil itself. There
need not be a speedy trial and Habeas Corpus is suspended.

          2.  Engage in police work on American soil. This
effectively repeals Posse Comitatus.
        

            This could be quite reminiscent of the Stalinist Soviet
Union or Nazi Germany where a knock on the door in the middle of the night meant
that the person taken by the military was often never seen again. This
measure’s detention principles are similar to the ones that sent innocent
Japanese-Americans into concentration camps during WW II.

            This bill has already been passed in the House of
Representatives with nary a whimper by a 322-96 vote.

              Senators Lindsey Graham(R-SC) and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH)
state that America is part of the battlefield and this bill is necessary. This
bill is over 600 pages long and is an attorneys' boon. It is totally unfocused,
directionless, and wide-ranging. Only the attorney profession will be allowed to
give it substance on an ad hoc basis.
 
              Those are well-connected within the legal system may
not have fear of this bill. However, most who are approached by the military,
under the banner of this law, must be the most apprehensive.

               This bill, because of the lobbyist setup of rules and
standards of protocols in Congress, is not even a stand-alone bill. The Senate
Armed Services Committee brought this as part of the military authorization
bill. It should be the subject of its own bill.

               Now is the time of Americans to galvanize the
support of the local police and of the military to support a constitutional
amendment calling for the ban of same-hands governance. The presence of
attorneys in office is unwarranted and is highly destructive to representative
governance.

               

                 Very Truly Yours,

                 Harsha Sankar
                908 Valley Ridge Road
                Covington, Virginia 24426  
                 
       

     





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Citizen,                                      
            March 1994


 

THIS NATION’S legal system needs
reforming. It’s slow, expensive and
inaccessible to many, and too often it’s corrupt and unjust.  The main reason
for this breakdown is that
lawyers are allowed to shape the legal system to serve their own purposes
instead of the public’s needs.  More than
100 million who have legal problems cannot afford to hire an attorney.  Here
are some reasons why Americans have
inadequate access to the legal system:

 

Many
      laws are hard to find and even harder to understand.Lawyers’
      hourly fees are about 10 times the average person’s hourly wage.Judges
      and court clerks are generally hostile to self-help efforts.  Because of
this, easy-to-use forms and
      procedures are rare.Many
      legal procedures (house sales probating an estate, settling divorces,
      etc.) are unnecessary and serve only to generate lawyers’
income.Non-lawyers who compete with lawyers by providing high-quality, low-cost
      legal-form-preparation services are punished as criminals.

 

The legal system’s real tragedy is
that it hurts those it’s supposed to help and doesn’t punish those who
commit
wrongs on others.

 

One example of the gross inadequacies
of our legal system is our tort system. 
Thousands of seriously injured victims don’t receive fair compensation,
while a relative few are overcompensated tremendously.However, trial lawyers
block any attempts at
much-needed reform because the present system is so lucrative for them. They
have so much control over state and
federal legislatures, through connections, campaign contributions, etc., that
they prevent well-meaning politicians from doing what’s right.

 

Another example is divorce. Instead of a process that helps people to separate
with dignity, lawyers
manage to convert people’s pain into billable hours for themselves.

 

Justice, the cure, should never be
worse than injustice, the disease.  This
nation’s rapidly reaching the point just described. 

 

It’s outrageous for people, businesses
and large corporations to spend $100 to $300 an hour to have their inalienable
rights interpreted, advocated and protected. 
The enormous sum of money that’s wasted could be put to productive use
to satisfy a legitimate need.  Lawyers don’t
to anything that’s considered productive, and anyone who can speak is capable
to advocating their claims.

 

Our once-proud system of law that
systematically ensured justice for all is now at a serious crossroads.  Lawyers
are mainly the ones benefiting form
this miserable muddle.  The legal
system’s purpose should be to serve the public, not make lawyers wealthy. 
The only way the public would truly be served
is for this nation’s laws to be clear-cut and simple so that people can have
their freedom.                                
Very Truly
Yours,                                 Harsha
Sankar                                 908
Valley Ridge Road                               
Covington,Virginia 24426
             




                                        \
           


 
























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Citizen,                                            
          October 1994 


 

Governor George Allen has proved to be
an ambitious administrator in his first year in office. He has proposed radical
changes that will
revamp and restructure the role of state government and how it is funded.
However,Governor Allen has demonstrated the
inability to prioritize and put things in perspective. He also has shown he
lacks understanding on
how wealth is created and on what government’s role in society should be.

 

Governor Allen’s initiatives and
proposals can be summed up in two ways:

 

1)     
He
wants to cut social services and aid in order to provide tax cuts.

2)   He
wants to deregulate business and reduce the power of government agencies that
regulate it.

 

While the second initiative is
essential for the creation of economic opportunities, the first will present
obstacles in the path of empowerment and social mobility. Moreover, even though
it is widely agreed
that big government is regressive, for anyone to simply cut services (even
though
inefficiently administrated) benefiting the needy just to provide tax relief to
high–income people (regardless of whether they are productive) is
inhumane.  Although the Governor is
correct to eliminate or decrease funding for pork-barrel projects, his plan to
reduce aid to the disenfranchised without tackling the waste government
produces in the private sector will only cause deep resentment and class
warfare. 

Government has two domestic
requirements it needs to fulfill in society. One of those is the provision of a
safety net so that people in strife
will have access to the bare necessities.

 

The other is total,unequivocal,and
equal protection of the basic rights of Virginians.  Reforming the legal system
which enables the
parasitic forces in society to drain vast amounts of capital from productive
Virginians should instead be a top item on the Governor’s agenda.  Governor
Allen’s constituents spend in excess
of three billion dollars annually in lawyer fees alone.  That figure itself
exceeds the amount of tax
revenue collected by this Commonwealth yearly. This dollar figure also
represents the amount of money Virginians are blackmailed by its three branches
of government to
pay lawyers in order to avoid punishment or forfeiture of their basic
rights.  That is where the true welfare
lies.  The amount of money spent to
assist the economically deprived (even though yielding a low rate of return)
pales in comparison to the figure just quoted.

 

If Governor Allen would just take
necessary steps to assist his constituents in obtaining justice without having
to foot such an expensive bill, these actions alone would truly reform the
welfare
system. People would not need welfare
because the abundance of new capital that would be available for investment
(instead
of currently being sucked up) would expand enormously the rate of productivity
and economic growth. This would give Virginians the opportunities they deserve.

 

Governor Allen must come to the
realization that people afflicted with poverty are not the cause of poverty,
but rather are the victims instead.  The
answer to this strife is legal reform.

                                   Very Truly
Yours,
                                    Harsha
Sankar                                   
Virginia























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Legal System Serves Only Lawyers-By Harsha Sankar(March 1994)


Dear Citizen, March 1994

THIS NATION’S legal system needs reforming. It’s slow, expensive and
inaccessible to many, and too often it’s corrupt and unjust. The main reason
for this breakdown is that lawyers are allowed to shape the legal system to
serve their own purposes instead of the public’s needs. More than 100 million
who have legal problems cannot afford to hire an attorney. Here are some reasons
why Americans have inadequate access to the legal system:

1. Many laws are hard to find and even harder to understand.
2. Lawyers’ hourly fees are about 10 times the average person’s hourly wage.
3. Judges and court clerks are generally hostile to self-help efforts. Because
of this, easy-to-use forms and procedures are rare.
4. Many legal procedures (house sales probating an estate, settling divorces,
etc.) are unnecessary and serve only to generate lawyers’ income.
5. Non-lawyers who compete with lawyers by providing high-quality, low-cost
legal-form-preparation services are punished as criminals.


The legal system’s real tragedy is that it hurts those it’s supposed to help
and doesn’t punish those who commit wrongs on others.

One example of the gross inadequacies of our legal system is our tort system.
Thousands of seriously injured victims don’t receive fair compensation, while
a relative few are overcompensated tremendously.However, trial lawyers block any
attempts at much-needed reform because the present system is so lucrative for
them. They have so much control over state and federal legislatures, through
connections, campaign contributions, etc., that they prevent well-meaning
politicians from doing what’s right.

Another example is divorce. Instead of a process that helps people to separate
with dignity, lawyers manage to convert people’s pain into billable hours for
themselves.

Justice, the cure, should never be worse than injustice, the disease.This
nation’s rapidly reaching the point just described.

It’s outrageous for people, businesses and large corporations to spend $100 to
$300 an hour to have their inalienable rights interpreted, advocated and
protected. The enormous sum of money that’s wasted could be put to productive
use to satisfy a legitimate need. Lawyers don’t to anything that’s
considered productive, and anyone who can speak is capable to advocating their
claims.

Our once-proud system of law that systematically ensured justice for all is now
at a serious crossroads. Lawyers are mainly the ones benefiting form this
miserable muddle. The legal system’s purpose should be to serve the public,
not make lawyers wealthy. The only way the public would truly be served is for
this nation’s laws to be clear-cut and simple so that people can have their
freedom.

Very Truly Yours,

Harsha Sankar

908 Valley Ridge Road

Covington,Virginia 24426

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ushering The Police State Via Military-By Harsha Sankar


Dear Citizen, December 2011

As the rolls of the Bar Association attorneys continue to swell, one can
continue to expect more oppressive and repressive legislation to be enacted that
continue to deprive more and more Americans of their rights.

The U.S. Senate is expecting to pass S.1867, which is the National Defense
Authorization Act. This bill gives policing power to the Department of
Defense.The military can

1. Indefinitely detain American citizens and lawful resident aliens throughout
the globe, including on American soil itself. There need not be a speedy trial
and Habeas Corpus is suspended.

2. Engage in police work on American soil. This effectively repeals Posse
Comitatus.


This could be quite reminiscent of the Stalinist Soviet Union or Nazi Germany
where a knock on the door in the middle of the night meant that the person taken
by the military was often never seen again. This measure’s detention
principles are similar to the ones that sent innocent Japanese-Americans into
concentration camps during WW II.

This bill has already been passed in the House of Representatives with nary a
whimper by a 322-96 vote.

Senators Lindsey Graham(R-SC) and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) state that America is part
of the battlefield and this bill is necessary. This bill is over 600 pages long
and is an attorneys' boon. It is totally unfocused, directionless, and
wide-ranging. Only the attorney profession will be allowed to give it substance
on an ad hoc basis.

Those are well-connected within the legal system may not have fear of this
bill.However, most who are approached by the military, under the banner of this
law, must be the most apprehensive.

This bill, because of the lobbyist setup of rules and standards of protocols in
Congress, is not even a stand-alone bill. The Senate Armed Services Committee
brought this as part of the military authorization bill. It should be the
subject of its own bill.

Now is the time of Americans to galvanize the support of the local police and of
the military to support a constitutional amendment calling for the ban of
same-hands governance. The presence of attorneys in office is unwarranted and is
highly destructive to representative governance.



Very Truly Yours,

Harsha Sankar
908 Valley Ridge Road
Covington, Virginia 24426

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 
 
Creation Of Wealth Is Remedy To Poverty-An Article By Harsha Sankar- October
1994


Dear Citizen,                             
 October 1994


Governor George Allen has proved to be an ambitious administrator in his first
year in office. He has proposed radical changes that will revamp and restructure
the role of state government and how it is funded. However,Governor Allen has
demonstrated the inability to prioritize and put things in perspective. He also
has shown he lacks understanding on how wealth is created and on what
government’s role in society should be.

Governor Allen’s initiatives and proposals can be summed up in two ways:


1) He wants to cut social services and aid in order to provide tax cuts.

2) He wants to deregulate business and reduce the power of government agencies
that regulate it.


While the second initiative is essential for the creation of economic
opportunities, the first will present obstacles in the path of empowerment and
social mobility. Moreover, even though it is widely agreed that big government
is regressive, for anyone to simply cut services (even though inefficiently
administrated) benefiting the needy just to provide tax relief to high–income
people (regardless of whether they are productive) is inhumane. Although the
Governor is correct to eliminate or decrease funding for pork-barrel projects,
his plan to reduce aid to the disenfranchised without tackling the waste
government produces in the private sector will only cause deep resentment and
class warfare.

Government has two domestic requirements it needs to fulfill in society. One of
those is the provision of a safety net so that people in strife will have access
to the bare necessities.

The other is total,unequivocal,and equal protection of the basic rights of
Virginians. Reforming the legal system which enables the parasitic forces in
society to drain vast amounts of capital from productive Virginians should
instead be a top item on the Governor’s agenda. Governor Allen’s
constituents spend in excess of three billion dollars annually in lawyer fees
alone. That figure itself exceeds the amount of tax revenue collected by this
Commonwealth yearly. This dollar figure also represents the amount of money
Virginians are blackmailed by its three branches of government to pay lawyers in
order to avoid punishment or forfeiture of their basic rights. That is where the
true welfare lies. The amount of money spent to assist the economically deprived
(even though yielding a low rate of return) pales in comparison to the figure
just quoted.

If Governor Allen would just take necessary steps to assist his constituents in
obtaining justice without having to foot such an expensive bill, these actions
alone would truly reform the welfare system. People would not need welfare
because the abundance of new capital that would be available for investment
(instead of currently being sucked up) would expand enormously the rate of
productivity and economic growth. This would give Virginians the opportunities
they deserve.

Governor Allen must come to the realization that people afflicted with poverty
are not the cause of poverty, but rather are the victims instead. The answer to
this strife is legal reform.


Very Truly Yours,

Harsha Sankar

Virginia



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I agree with the premise that attorneys are nothing but robbers. Here  is a
copy of a letter I sent to several newspapers.  I have never seen it  in
print. I emailed the editor of the warren tribune newspaper asking him if he
intended to print my letter.  I did not get a response.


Dear Editor;
I am writing in reference to Trumbull County Judge Peter J. Kontos
election to serve as president of the Ohio Common Please Judges Association for
2012.
My family had a case before Judge Kontos and it is our  opinion that Judge
Kontos is most bias against persons that represent themselves  in his court.
An attorney broke into my wife’s safety deposit box that  was located in
the Vienna Ohio branch of Cortland Bank. The attorney removed the  contents of
the safety deposit box and refused to return the contents to the  rightful
owner, my wife.
We filed a lawsuit to recover the contents in the  Trumbull County Common
Pleas Court.  We were able to recover most of the safety deposit box’s
contents. A  different judge heard the case than Kontos.
We then filed a lawsuit against Cortland Bank and the  attorney that
removed the safety deposit box contents.
Judge Kontos was assigned to hear the wrongful taking  case.  We
represented ourselves  during the entire litigation process for the recovery of
the
items.
I have found Judge Kontos to be arrogant, abusive, and  most of all
completely bias in his application of the law.
We presented legal proof that Cortland Bank had no  authority to permit any
person into the safe deposit box to no avail.
No person is legally permitted to gain entrance into a  safe deposit box
other than the owner thereof, or in the case of a court order  being presented
to the bank.
Although there was no court order issued, Cortland Bank  to allowed a party
to obtain a locksmith and open the box, and thus remove the  contents.
In view that there was no court order, Cortland Bank was  unauthorized to
permit any person into a privately owned safe deposit box. The  attorney in
question   had no  legal, or otherwise connection to my wife of our family.
By court action we recovered some items, but not all  items that resided in
the safe deposit box.
It is our opinion that Judge Kontos was bias in favor of  Cortland Bank and
against our family.  A reading of our court case against Cortland Bank and
attorney Eugene  Smith will show how a supposedly well-respected judge can
devastate a  self-litigant’s case at will. When judicial bias occurs, there
is almost no  meaningful recourse, and judge Kontos fully knew that it is
next to impossible  to overcome his bias in a higher court.
The Ohio Common Please Judges Association mission is “to  improve the law,
the legal system and the effective administration of  Justice”.
One can only notice, the mission does not provide judges  to not be bias
against self-litigators.
What a laugh!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

go to eaby and buy a spy pen 4 gig does a real nice video audio, then go talk to
that guy, and make him a youtube movie. i'ts legal in the state of Missouri and
Kansas to video tape as long is the guy is dressed and your in the conversion. I
got a wrist watch and penand it goes right through the metal detectors at the
court house.  I've done it! $25.00 to $45.00.

To: PeopleBeforeLawyers@yahoogroups.com
From: consultants4all@...
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 20:45:32 -0500
Subject: [People B4 Lawyers] Re: Legal System Serves Only Lawyers-By Harsha
Sankar(March 1994)




























       I agree with the premise that attorneys are nothing but robbers. Here  is
a

copy of a letter I sent to several newspapers.  I have never seen it  in

print. I emailed the editor of the warren tribune newspaper asking him if he

intended to print my letter.  I did not get a response.





Dear Editor;

I am writing in reference to Trumbull County Judge Peter J. Kontos

election to serve as president of the Ohio Common Please Judges Association for

2012.

My family had a case before Judge Kontos and it is our  opinion that Judge

Kontos is most bias against persons that represent themselves  in his court.

An attorney broke into my wife�s safety deposit box that  was located in

the Vienna Ohio branch of Cortland Bank. The attorney removed the  contents of

the safety deposit box and refused to return the contents to the  rightful

owner, my wife.

We filed a lawsuit to recover the contents in the  Trumbull County Common

Pleas Court.  We were able to recover most of the safety deposit box�s

contents. A  different judge heard the case than Kontos.

We then filed a lawsuit against Cortland Bank and the  attorney that

removed the safety deposit box contents.

Judge Kontos was assigned to hear the wrongful taking  case.  We

represented ourselves  during the entire litigation process for the recovery of
the

items.

I have found Judge Kontos to be arrogant, abusive, and  most of all

completely bias in his application of the law.

We presented legal proof that Cortland Bank had no  authority to permit any

person into the safe deposit box to no avail.

No person is legally permitted to gain entrance into a  safe deposit box

other than the owner thereof, or in the case of a court order  being presented

to the bank.

Although there was no court order issued, Cortland Bank  to allowed a party

to obtain a locksmith and open the box, and thus remove the  contents.

In view that there was no court order, Cortland Bank was  unauthorized to

permit any person into a privately owned safe deposit box. The  attorney in

question   had no  legal, or otherwise connection to my wife of our family.

By court action we recovered some items, but not all  items that resided in

the safe deposit box.

It is our opinion that Judge Kontos was bias in favor of  Cortland Bank and

against our family.  A reading of our court case against Cortland Bank and

attorney Eugene  Smith will show how a supposedly well-respected judge can

devastate a  self-litigant�s case at will. When judicial bias occurs, there

is almost no  meaningful recourse, and judge Kontos fully knew that it is

next to impossible  to overcome his bias in a higher court.

The Ohio Common Please Judges Association mission is �to  improve the law,

the legal system and the effective administration of  Justice�.

One can only notice, the mission does not provide judges  to not be bias

against self-litigators.

What a laugh!



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- On Wed, 1/11/12, JEREBEERY@... <JEREBEERY@...> wrote:







OFFE BULLETIN (113)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 22, 2011
 
Your Military Service will be used
Against You in a Divorce
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/11/21/your-military-service-will-be-used-again\
st-you-in-a-divorce/
In today’s world marriages which last a lifetime are extremely rare. In our
society today, failed marriages and divorce are common place. You no longer need
a real reason to file for divorce; you merely have to file and the divorce will
be granted. In most states, it’s about that easy.  
The information contained in this article is nothing new. The coldhearted
tactics described below are used successfully every day in every state in the
U.S. Divorce attorneys and Department of Family and Children Service
professionals make their living on broken families and failed marriages. Divorce
and child custody law is a multibillion dollar business. Attorneys and DFAC
professionals thrive on those going through a divorce. The more divorces there
are, the more money these individuals make. If no one got a divorce, they would
be out of business.
In addition, divorce attorneys will not hesitate to use every trick in the book
to get their client the largest award possible. To many attorneys it is all
about money and nothing else.
One particular group of individuals is more vulnerable to civil court abuse than
most others. Sadly, our military personnel and disabled veterans (men and women)
have been singled out as very likely to be discredited and disqualified as
parents for several different reasons. These men and women routinely have their
military service used against them in divorce court. From their mandatory
extended deployments, to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), to the inclusion
of VA disability compensation as ‘income’ when calculating alimony, it often
seems that everything possible is used against the veteran. Divorce attorneys
have a wide range of tactics and strategies they use to portray our veterans as
irresponsible, unpredictable, mentally and emotionally unstable, and many as
capable of domestic violence.
In May of 2010, a delegation from Operation Firing For Effect (OFFE) traveled to
Key West, Florida to attend Earnest Pridemore’s divorce hearing. Mr. Pridemore
represented himself, and attorney David L. Manz of Marathon, Florida represented
Mrs. Pridemore. At one point in the hearing, in support of a restraining order
against Mr. Pridemore, Manz implied that all military veterans were high risks
for spousal abuse and domestic violence by virtue of their military training,
which aggressively teaches them to kill and destroy.
Civil Court Judge Mark Jones did not strike Manz’s statement and it was
allowed into the hearing transcript. This anti-military statement by attorney
Manz is a perfect example of how low some attorneys will go to discredit an
honorable military veteran. Earnest Pridemore was ordered to surrender his
antique firearm collection to sheriff’s deputies. OFFE has received dozens of
similar complaints from active duty personnel and veterans.  Every day in
courtrooms across the nation military veterans and active duty personnel are
having their service in the United States Armed Forces used against them.
Veterans and active military personnel are losing custody, parental rights, and
even visitation based on PTSD ratings and overseas deployments. The twisted
logic behind these unjust court rulings is: a PTSD diagnosis implies emotional
instability and unpredictable behavior; and an extended tour of duty overseas
indicates a lack of contact and involvement in the development of one’s child
or children. In fact, in some cases where a parent ‘voluntarily’ and
‘willingly’ joined the military after the birth of a child, they are being
accused of intentional abandonment. Unfortunately, all of these factors (&
others) are being used against our veterans and military personnel who are going
through a divorce and seeking custody of, or just visitation with, their child
or children.
Another tactic being used by attorneys is convincing court judges to award
alimony and child support based solely on a totally disabled veteran’s
disability compensation. This practice goes against established federal law
which protects disability compensation from attachment in any legal process
whatsoever. The disabled veteran is forced to give their VA disability
compensation to their ex-spouse, or go to jail for contempt. Some civil court
judges claim that they do not have to honor federal law in state divorce court.
Attorneys have even gone as far as to include wording in divorce settlements
covering the possibility that a veteran might become disabled and might receive
disability compensation in the future. If that occurs, those funds will then be
used to increase their ex-spouse’s alimony award. In other words, before a
disabled veteran even receives a disability rating or compensation, their
ex-spouse has already been awarded a significant portion of this money.
Divorce attorneys routinely paint a distorted picture of our military personnel
and disabled veterans. OFFE has documented multiple cases where disabled
veterans have unconscionably had their hunting guns taken away during a divorce
for no reason other than that the veteran had a PTSD rating. This action
automatically depicts the veteran as dangerous, which is the opposing
attorney’s objective. 
Another abuse OFFE has documented is retired military personnel losing as much
as half of their retirement to an ex-spouse to whom they were not married to
during their military service. Although the ex-spouse contributed nothing to the
veteran’s military career, they will receive military retirement moneys.
OFFE has also documented cases where the reason given for the divorce is because
the veteran is disabled and the spouse does not wish to contribute to their care
any longer. Then, adding insult to injury, the ex-spouse is awarded a large
portion of the veteran’s disability compensation. Compensation the veteran
receives for the same disabilities their former spouse used as an excuse for the
divorce.
Some of our nation’s most deserving (our disabled veterans) are suffering
great hardship at the hands of civil court judges who couldn’t care less how
many Purple Hearts they have, or how many limbs they have left. Too often, the
primary objective of divorce attorneys is to shake loose the federal money our
veterans receive as compensation for their disabilities - so their client can
pay them for their legal representation. Everyone in the court room has a vested
interest in the veteran’s disability compensation.
Realizing every case is different; ask yourself a very simple question. Take the
word “veteran” out of the divorce equation. Two individuals get a no-fault
divorced. One is able bodied and capable of working, and one is severely
disabled and unable to work. Which one do you think should receive alimony?
OFFE is currently monitoring 150 separate cases of veteran abuse in divorce
courts nationwide. OFFE has devoted 10 years of research to these problems. To
date, 9 of OFFE’s disabled veterans have been jailed for refusing to use their
VA disability compensation to pay alimony and/or support. Suicide among our
former and active duty military far exceeds the national average. Depending on
the age range examined, veteran suicide rates are as much as 400% higher than
that of the corresponding civilian population. OFFE is convinced that there is a
direct link between divorce, homelessness and suicide among our veteran and
active duty military population. Creating a situation where a parent is homeless
or takes their own life is not in the best interest of any child.
As a nation, we ask our young men and women to serve in our military, and if
necessary kill and destroy for our protection. Then, we stand quietly by as
aspects of our legal system use their military service against them.
[Footnote] Finding an attorney to represent a veteran’s best interest in a
divorce is extremely difficult, as most are not willing to go against the status
quo. It is also very difficult to find case law which rules in the veteran’s
favor. Two attorneys who deserve an honorable mention are; Frederick Stud Jones
of Georgia, and Patricia Campbell of Ohio, both of whom recognize the problems
facing our veterans in civil court. In addition, Cote v. Cote (2011 VT 92 No.
2010-057) heard by the Vermont Supreme Court in August 2011 demonstrates the
proper way to treat veteran’s disability compensation in a divorce.
 
Jere Beery
OFFE National Public Relations Director
jerebeery@...
 

State Civil Courts Conspire to Defraud American Taxpayers and Our Disabled
Veterans
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/11/03/state-civil-courts-conspire-to-defraud-a\
merican-taxpayers-and-our-nations-disabled-veterans/
November 1, 2011
Do you pay Federal income taxes every year? Do you know where your tax dollars
go? What if I told you the Federal tax dollars you pay which are earmarked for
the NASA Space Program are being diverted to third parties not associated with
NASA in any way? Would you be upset and concerned? Of course you would. No one
likes to be lied to, and no one likes to be swindled out of their hard earned
money.
Well, NASA is safe for now. However, a 9 year study conducted by Operation
Firing For Effect, (the Veterans Advocacy Group), has documented hundreds of
cases where just such diversions of Federal tax dollars have, and are taking
place every day in civil courts around the entire nation.
When you pay your federal taxes every year the U.S. government earmarks billions
of your dollars for veteran’s healthcare, veteran’s vocational
rehabilitation, and veteran’s disability compensation. These programs and
services are meant exclusively for our veterans and eligible dependents. Federal
laws established after the Revolutionary War are suppose to protect these funds
from being used for any purposes other than the care and welfare of our former
military personnel. Operation Firing For Effect has documented evidence that
severely disabled veterans are being forced to forfeit their awarded disability
compensation to able bodied ineligible third parties or go to jail for contempt.
Veterans wounded and severely disabled in combat and in the line of duty receive
disability compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs. In a case where
a combat disabled veteran is rated 100% totally and permanently disabled and
unable to work, the veteran only has their disability compensation to survive
on. They live on a fixed monthly annuity, and they have no other way to
supplement their living funds with additional income. This disability
compensation is awarded to the veteran and is supposed to be tax free. It is not
considered as ‘income’ by the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Social
Security Administration, the Internal Revenue Service, or the U.S. Federal
Bankruptcy Court. Contrary to the Federal laws and the definition as prescribed
by these Federal agencies, state divorce courts insist on considering
veteran’s disability compensation as ‘income’ and therefore civil court
judges illegally award alimony based solely on
  said disability compensation.
This mindset by civil court judges and family divorce attorneys has, and is
causing great hardship among our disabled veterans. Our study has revealed that
this practice by state civil courts has directly led to homelessness and suicide
among a large number of our disabled defenders, and we have documentation which
supports these findings.
When a severely disabled veteran is going through a divorce, a civil court judge
doesn’t care if the veteran has no arms or legs, is in a wheelchair, or even
bedridden. The only factor the judge considers is that the veteran receives a
monthly check that the spouse does not receive, and the spouse is therefore
entitle to a significant portion of that money. In many of the cases we are
monitoring the reason given by the spouse for the divorce is because the veteran
is disabled and not the same person the spouse married. Then, to add insult to
injury, the judge awards alimony based solely on the disability compensation the
veteran is receiving because of those same disabilities. Even when the veteran
was not married at the time of their military service, civil court judges
routinely award alimony based entirely on the veteran’s disability benefits
anyway.
These alimony awards are not regulated and the amounts can be any portion of the
veteran’s compensation. In most of the cases we are following the alimony
amounts are extreme and leave the veteran with very little to even live on.
Every day in divorce courts nationwide a well-orchestrated production by judges,
attorneys, and legal professionals is executed with precision. Their objectives
are to shakedown our disabled heroes and access the Federal monies they receive.
Many attorneys even refer to VA disability compensation as “Golden Money”.
State Bar Associations and DFACS (Department of Family and Children Services)
professionals are also directly involved in this conspiracy to defraud our
disabled veterans and the American tax payer. This form of mistreatment
routinely takes place in courtrooms nationwide every day. It doesn’t take a
rocket scientist to see what is happening here. Divorce lawyers and civil court
judges have found a “cash cow” in veterans’ disability benefits and they
are milking it dry. This practice clearly is a miscarriage of justice.
When disabled combat veterans (female or male) fall on hard times lose their
jobs and house, facing bankruptcy, experiencing failing health, emotionally
distraught, and are going through a divorce, the feelings of hopelessness and
helplessness can be overwhelming. When facing such hardships in life the one
thing a disabled veteran should be able to count on are his or her military
benefits – which in many cases they earned on the battlefield with their
blood, sweat, and tears. It is at these low points in life when these disability
benefits are needed the most and when they can help the most. To allow anyone
the ability to arbitrarily, ambiguously, and illegally take these benefits from
them is cruel and unjust. 
United States Code, Title 38, section 5301 is very clear about the protection of
veteran’s disability compensation, and reads as follows;
(a)     Payments of benefits due or to become due under any law administered
by the Secretary shall not be assignable except to the extent specifically
authorized by law, and such payments made to, or on account of a beneficiary
shall be exempt from taxation, shall be exempt from the claim of creditors, and
shall not be liable to attachment, levy, or seizure by or under any legal or
equitable process whatever, either before or after receipt by the beneficiary.
The Federal statute also states;
(3) (A) This paragraph is intended to clarify that, in any case where a
beneficiary entitled to compensation, pension, or dependency and indemnity
compensation enters into an agreement with another person under which agreement
such other person acquires for consideration the right to receive such benefit
by payment of such compensation, pension, or dependency and indemnity
compensation, as the case may be, except as provided in subparagraph (B), and
including deposit into a joint account from which such other person may make
withdrawals, or otherwise, such agreement shall be deemed to be an assignment
and is prohibited.
In other words, it could be a Federal crime for a U.S. disabled veteran to enter
into a state court divorce settlement agreement in which the veteran’s
benefits are to be diverted (paid) to a third party.
Divorce attorneys and civil court judges claim this Federal law doesn’t apply
to divorce court, and that by state law they can take part, or all of a disabled
veteran’s disability compensation if they so wish to. This is not what the
Congressional writers and signers of the Federal law intended when they passed
protection of veterans’ benefits legislation.
Now, you might ask; “Why would anyone want to do this to our disabled
veterans?” The answer is simple, greed. When the judge awards alimony based
solely on a veteran’s disability compensation, the first obligation the
ex-spouse has is to pay their attorney. Then, the disabled veteran has to pay
their own attorney. Both attorneys will collect several thousand dollars each,
all of which will come from the veteran’s benefits. The judge will attach
court cost to the settlement and the veteran will pay that amount also. In other
words, everyone in the court room has a vested interest in the veteran’s
disability compensation and they all will get a piece of that disability money.
The disabled veteran is now without the funds to even appeal the ruling.
(Another miscarriage of justice where the Veteran is the scapegoat)
To summarize, millions of your Federal tax dollars which you think are being
used to care for our disabled veterans are being diverted to ineligible able
bodied third parties in civil courts nationwide, and our veterans are suffering
greatly because of this injustice.
Operation Firing For Effect is the only veterans’ service organization
currently aggressively pursuing a solution to this problem. It is our hope that
all national veteran service organizations will join us in this battle in the
very near future. We depend on our men and women in uniform to protect and
preserve our rights and freedoms, and they must be able to depend on us to
protect and preserve their rights and benefits. We are asking Congress to do
exactly that and take immediate action to enforce the Federal protection of
veteran’s disability compensation as dictated by Federal code. We are
currently in contact with several Congressional Representatives concerning this
issue. If you are concerned about the way your tax dollars are being mishandled
we urge you to contact your representative immediately. 
To learn more about this issue, visit; WWW.AREA5301.NET
Also, you may view these videos;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBJ91AvAHU8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QUqoJfyATg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyANu07a0u4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJZS96P6dH8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSB--oleahE
OFFE National Public Relations Director
JERE BEERY
jerebeery@...

Veteran Court Conspiracy Exposed
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/12/17/veteran-court-conspiracy-exposed/
December 14, 2011
Veterans around the country are being victimized by lawyers who prey on them,
their families, and the American tax payers. Our military families have things
bad enough, so much worse when one member is constantly deployed, but this
story, this one goes so much further than that. You won’t believe what is
going on.
It started in Las Vegas with one lawyer and then another one in North Carolina.
Their details are below. We want you to note who they are and everything they
have done to American vets and their families. One big issue, of course, is
veteran’s disability compensation.
By law, traditionally, this money has been designated as not just untaxable but
untouchable. This was Federal Law, this is Federal Law but that law is being
rewritten, not officially, but illegally by local courts, not to help families
or secure children but to enrich lawyers in illegal schemes that violate every
ethical code imaginable. Why is no one doing anything about this?
A issue VFVC has been working on for over nine years is the lack of enforcement
of the federal protection of veterans’ disability compensation in state civil
courts as outlined in 38 USC, § 5301. VFVC volunteers have devoted thousands of
hours and traveled tens of thousands of miles investigating the improper
categorization of veteran’s disability compensation as “income” by civil
court judges and family law attorneys in divorce settlements. According to VFVC
National Chairman, Gene D. Simes, VFVC is now ready to release its findings to
the American public.
VFVC’s nine year investigation has found that a small number of attorneys are
directly responsible for the development of a majority of the “illegal”
policies and legislation designed to strip retired military and disabled
veterans of their retirement pay and disability compensation. In this writing,
VFVC is revealing two of the main architects of the scam to steal federal tax
dollars while simultaneously stripping our disabled veterans of their earned
disability benefits.
The two most egregious offenders in this realm are Marshal Willick of Las Vegas,
Nevada (practicing exclusively in domestic relations & family law, both trial
and appellate) and Mark E. Sullivan of Raleigh, North Carolina .
Sullivan has limited his trial practice to family law since 1981 and has been
certified by the North Carolina State Bar as a Family Law Specialist since
1989.Both Willick and Sullivan have published handbooks on how to “work the
system” when it comes to military/veteran divorces, advising other attorneys
how to maximize the amount of retirement and veteran benefits they can obtain
for their non-veteran clients.
Marshal Willick wrote the first textbook, “Military Retirement Benefits in
Divorce: A Lawyer’s Guide to Valuation and Distribution” for the American
Bar Association in 1998. Additionally, he has written articles and taught
continuing legal education (CLE) seminars on the subject for over 20 years.
Mark Sullivan’s book, “The Military Divorce Handbook”, was published in
May 2006 by the American Bar Association. Willick and Sullivan have both
testified before Congress on the subject, and are considered by many to be
“experts” on the issue of military divorces. Both attorneys’ handbooks are
available for sale on their respective web sites.
In 2007, Willick authored another handbook titles; “HITTING THE JACKPOT IN
PENSION CASES: SECRETS TO GETTING THE RETIREMENT SHARE YOUR CLIENT DESERVES”.
Apparently, Willick considers going after a veteran’s retirement pay and
disability compensation as some sort of gambling game of chance. In this
publication Willick divulges what he refers to as “secrets” on how to drain
every penny possible from a retired military veteran, including any disability
compensation the veteran may be receiving.
In his 28,684 word, 52 page booklet, Willick never once mentions the federal
laws specifically written to protect a disabled veteran’s disability
compensation from slick attorneys such as himself. It is as though 38 USC, §
5301 never existed. How convenient.
Gene Simes says Willick and Sullivan have made millions of dollars by distorting
the facts surrounding veterans’ military retirement pay, disability
compensation, and Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC). They do this by
creating the illusion that all of these financial elements are exactly the same
and therefore must be treated the same in a divorce. This position is far from
the truth. Military retirement pay is administered by the Department of Defense,
is taxable income and falls under the jurisdiction of Uniformed Services Former
Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA), and is a can of worms all to its self.
However, veteran’s disability compensation is administered by the Department
of Veterans Affairs and is tax exempt. By combining and addressing these very
different programs as though they were one, Willick and Sullivan intentionally
ignore the federal protection of veterans’ disability compensation, clearly
codified nearly 200 years ago.
The following excerpt from the TWENTIETH CONGRESS (1828) support this argument.
CHAP. LIII – An Act for the relief of certain surviving officers and soldiers
of the army of the revolution. [Approved May 15, 1828]Sec. 4. And be it further
enacted, That the pay allowed by this act shall, under the direction of the
Secretary Treasury, be paid to the officer or soldier entitled thereto, or to
their authorized attorney, as such places and days as said secretary may direct;
and that no foreign officer shall be entitled to said pay, nor shall any officer
or soldier receive the same, until he furnish to said secretary satisfactory
evidence that he is entitled to the same conformity to the provisions of this
act; and the pay allowed by this act shall not, in any way, be transferable or
liable to attachment, levy, or seizure, by any legal process whatever, but shall
inure wholly to the personal benefit of the officer or soldier entitled to the
same by this act. (Source: U.S. Congressional Record / Library of Congress)
The current federal law, United States Code, Title 38, section 5301 is very
clear about the protection of veteran’s disability compensation, and reads as
follows;
Payments of benefits due or to become due under any law administered by the
Secretary shall not be assignable except to the extent specifically authorized
by law, and such payments made to, or on account of a beneficiary shall be
exempt from taxation, shall be exempt from the claim of creditors, and shall not
be liable to attachment, levy, or seizure by or under any legal or equitable
process whatever, either before or after receipt by the beneficiary.
Willick and Sullivan claim that this federal law carries absolutely no relevance
in dividing veteran’s disability compensation in state divorce law. They point
to a 1987 Supreme Court ruling in the case of Rose v. Rose to support their
argument. By the end of this article you will understand why these two attorneys
make this claim.
Simes says Willick and Sullivan are taking wording out of context in the Rose v.
Rose case to bolster their bogus legal argument that disability compensation is
not protected in any way. Simes points out that Rose v. Rose was a contempt of
court case, not a veteran’s disability distribution case. The only two
governmental entities with legal authority regarding who gets disability
compensation, how much they get, and when they get it are the U.S. Congress and
the Department of Veterans Affairs; not the Supreme Court.
Gene Simes also points out that Rose v. Rose involved a retired military person
who had waived a portion of his retirement pay in order to receive disability
compensation as allowed by federal law. To use the same equation to access the
disability compensation of a veteran who is not retired is more often
financially devastating, since in many cases the severely disabled veteran has
nothing to survive on other than their disability compensation.
Attorney Marshal Willick claims that veterans are merely attempting to avoid
paying alimony and child support by using an old outdated federal law. Simes
says Willick is the one victimizing the veterans, their spouses, and children.
Willick hides behind the spouse and child/children while arguing for a large
alimony and child support settlement, then takes a large percentage of the award
for himself. VFVC/OFFE has acquired a number of documents which illustrate how
Willick exploits spouses and children of veterans to line his own pocket.
Among these documents are several contingency agreements signed by Willick which
grant him 50% of all moneys awarded to his client in alimony and child support.
In other words, half of all moneys awarded to a spouse for alimony and child
support go directly into Willick’s pocket. VFVC members feel that such
contingency agreements reek of ethics violations and are clearly a conflict of
interest.
Willick and Sullivan are also experts in the use of military service against a
veteran when awarding alimony, child support, child custody, and even child
visitation. Veterans and active military personnel are losing custody, parental
rights, and even visitation based on PTSD ratings and overseas deployments.The
twisted logic behind these unjust court rulings is: a PTSD diagnosis implies
emotional instability and unpredictable behavior; and an extended tour of duty
overseas indicates a lack of contact and involvement in the development of
one’s child or children. In fact, in some cases where a parent
‘voluntarily’ and ‘willingly’ joined the military after the birth of a
child, they are being accused of intentional abandonment.
Unfortunately, all of these factors (& others) are being used against our
veterans and military personnel who are going through a divorce and seeking
custody of or just visitation with their child or children. Willick and Sullivan
swing from one strategy to another depending on the case.
From veterans are dangerous individuals unfit to care for their children, to
military service is no more dangerous than working on a construction site. In a
recent email exchange between Willick and members of VFVC, Willick minimizes and
degrades military service by claiming; “Zoo keepers “put their lives on the
line,” as do construction workers, cops, fire-fighters, and a host of others.
The sort of entitlement mentality exhibited by the military groups is not
(usually) seen from any of those workers, and neither would or should be
tolerated if it was tried.”
Belittling and trivializing the dangers associated with military service is a
signature tactic used by Willick and attorneys who subscribe to his way of
litigating.Willick goes on to claim; “The source of the disability is simply
irrelevant to the distribution of benefits and burdens after such a disability.
If there is disability income, it is the separate property of the individual
receiving it, meant to compensate for future lost wages – but it is income.
Sorting out who should get, and pay, what, among the individual facts of
individual cases, is what divorce courts are for.”
Gene Simes takes issue with Willick’s ignorance and arrogance. State divorce
courts are not authorized to distribute veteran’s disability benefits. The
Department of Veterans Affairs, Internal Revenue Service, Social Security
Administration, and U.S. Federal Bankruptcy Court do not define tax-exempt
veterans’ disability compensation as “Income”. Marshal Willick is simply
making this stuff up as he goes.
Another tactic Willick and Sullivan use to get legislators to subscribe to their
distorted and perverted attacks on our veterans is political blackmail. Willick,
Sullivan and other attorneys threaten to expose state and federal politicians
and elected judges as “anti-child support” and “anti-alimony” if they do
not agree to support their distorted interpretation of veteran’s
benefits.Willick and Sullivan have advised elected officials that such a stance
would be political suicide.
To date, this strategy has resulted in the defeat of attempts in several states
to pass legislation which enforces the absolute protection of veterans’
disability compensation under any legal process whatsoever as intended by
federal law. Apparently, most elected politicians are scared off by these
threats and won’t stand up for the rights of our disabled veterans.Willick ,
Sullivan, and others have found a “cash cow” in military retirement and
veterans’ disability benefits and they are milking it dry.Many attorneys refer
to disability compensation checks as “Golden”, as they are guaranteed to be
there on the first of every month.
In his seminars, Willick also teaches other attorneys the dirty trick of how to
attach their client’s legal fees to the veteran’s court order. At some point
in the divorce hearing Willick will submit a motion that his legal fees be
attached to the divorce settlement court order. When the judge agrees, the
disabled veteran is ordered to pay their ex-spouse’s attorney fees as well as
their own. After the judge adds court costs to the ruling, the veteran’s
disability compensation ends up in their ex-spouse’s pocket, their
ex-spouse’s attorney’s pocket, their own attorney’s pocket, and the
court’s pocket. Everyone in the courtroom has a vested interest in the
veteran’s disability compensation.
Too often, the veteran is left with only a fraction of his/her disability
compensation to live on, not even enough to hire another attorney and appeal the
ruling. In most cases, not enough to even meet their own living expenses.
Willick and Sullivan have even gone as far as to include wording in divorce
settlements covering the possibility that a veteran might become disabled and
might receive disability compensation in the future. If that occurs, those funds
will then be used to increase their ex-spouse’s alimony award.
In other words, before a veteran even receives a disability rating or
compensation, their ex-spouse has already been awarded a significant portion of
this money.According to Gene Simes, these two attorneys are coconspirators and
both are directly responsible for infecting state family law legislation and
state policies nationwide with their own brand of justice and greed.
They both use underhanded techniques and legal deception designed to illegally
strip our veterans of their earned retirement, benefits, and entitlements. Simes
says, Willick and Sullivan are directly responsible for the increased number of
veterans who are homeless, emotionally distraught, and suicidal.
These attorneys have violated not only their Code of Conduct, but have dismissed
federal laws which are protected under the U.S. Constitution.Simes says, Willick
and Sullivan have made a couple of critical miscalculations in their operations.
They assume veteran’s disability compensation funds belong only to the
veteran, which is false.
These funds belong to the American tax payer and are designated exclusively for
use by the individual wounded or injured in the line of duty. We are convinced
that the tax payers of this country will be outraged when they discover
self-serving attorneys are diverting federal tax dollars to ineligible, able
body, non-military third parties, and into their own pockets.
Another mistake Willick, Sullivan, and other attorneys make is forcing (with the
threat of jail) disabled veterans to sign a divorce settlement agreement in
which their disability compensation is listed as a funding source for alimony
and/or child support.
USC, Title 38, section 5301 reads as follows;
(3) (A)This paragraph is intended to clarify that, in any case where a
beneficiary entitled to compensation, pension, or dependency and indemnity
compensation enters into an agreement with another person under which agreement
such other person acquires for consideration the right to receive such benefit
by payment of such compensation, pension, or dependency and indemnity
compensation, as the case may be, except as provided in subparagraph(B), and
including deposit into a joint account from which such other person may make
withdrawals, or otherwise, such agreement shall be deemed to be an assignment
and is prohibited.
In other words, it is a Federal crime for a U.S. disabled veteran to enter into
a state court divorce settlement agreement in which the veteran’s disability
benefits are to be diverted (paid) to a third party.
There are a number of key coconspirators involved in the infestation of state
civil courts nationwide, and VFVC plans to expose all of these individuals at
the right time. VFVC has acquired a number of documents which reveal the
conspiracy to violate the federal protection of veterans’ disability
compensation, all of which cannot be displayed in this single article.
Gene Simes says, the battle lines have been drawn and he expects this issue to
fester and burst wide open during the upcoming 2012 election year.
VFVC Inc. is considering a number of options to include filing Class Action
Suits, filing formal complaints with the Nevada and North Carolina Bar
Associations, filing formal complaints with the American Bar Association, and
U.S. Department of Justice (RICO Division).
Simes adds that a coalition of veterans organizations is being organized and are
preparing to publicly expose and confront everyone involved in this conspiracy
to defraud our combat disabled veterans, their spouses, their children, and the
American tax payer.
Gene Simes and the members of VFVC Inc. are demanding a full investigation and
formal public Congressional hearing concerning the continued exploitation of
veteran’s benefits in state civil courts nationwide on behalf of all of our
nation’s former military personnel, their families, and the American tax
payer.
Veterans For Veteran Connection, Inc. (VFVC) is a grassroots veteran’s
advocacy group devoted to the improvement and protection of benefits,
entitlements, and services provided to our country’s former military personnel
and their families. VFVC is a registered non-profit bipartisan 501 (C)19
veterans service organization headquartered in Walworth, New York.Operation
Firing For Effect (OFFE) is the operational arm of VFVC, Inc. designated to
conduct lobbying efforts in Washington DC, as well as rallies and demonstrations
promoting legislative and policy changes to ensure and protect veteran’s
rights nationwide.
Some of the issues VFVC/OFFE have championed over the past 10 years are;
mandatory full funding for veterans’ healthcare, preferential job placement
for veterans, and several program concepts to address the nation’s increasing
number of homeless veterans. VFVC Inc./OFFE also contributed to the development
of the Department of Veterans Affairs national suicide hot line headquartered in
Canandaigua, New York.
For more information, contact Gene Simes at; (315)986-7322
Jere Beery
VFVC/OFFE National Public Relations Director
jerebeery@...
 
 




 





 
JERE BEERY
Veterans Rights Advocate
OFFE National Public Relations Director
AREA 5301 Founder & Pointman

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

    Dear Citizen,                           
January 2012


            All these abuses will persist as long as attorneys are in
office.

                                Very Truly Yours,

                                  Harsha Sankar

            


--- On Sun, 1/15/12, AmeriPAC <patriot@...> wrote:



Obama Abuses His Power


             View this Email as a Web Page









Obama Declares War On Congress


   Take Action  Now & Demand An Investigation


   Into Obama's Unprecedented Power Grab!

URGENT: Obama has circumvented Congress and confirmed  liberal zealot Richard
Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau  (CFPB.)

Obama further defied Congress by filling three  vacancies on the National Labor
Relations Board. Even though Congress  technically wasn’t in recess, Obama is
claiming that these are “recess  appointments.” Obama’s underhanded power
grab is being hailed by consumer  groups and unions as a victory.

   According to Senate  Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) the move puts the
Consumer Financial  Protection Bureau in “uncertain legal territory.” He
continued and said,



   “This recess appointment  represents a sharp departure from a long-standing
precedent that has limited  the President to recess appointments only when the
Senate is in a recess of 10  days or longer."



Take Action  Now & Demand An Investigation


   Into Obama's

   Unprecedented Power Grab!



   Richard  Cordray has a long history of questionable activities. In 2008,
Cordray used tax dollars to pay for the legal defense of  three former
government employees who illegally accessed personal information  about Joe
Wurzelbacher (“Joe the Plumber.”)  He’s also an Obama fundraiser and well
known  liberal ideologue.

   In response to his  critics, Obama said,



   “I refuse to take  ‘No’ for an answer. I’ve said before that I will
continue to look for every  opportunity to work with Congress to move this
country forward. But when  Congress refuses to act in a way that hurts our
economy and puts people at  risk, I have an obligation as president to do what I
can without them.”

   Take Action  Now & Demand An Investigation


     Into Obama's

     Unprecedented Power Grab!



Be sure to MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD TODAY!

Defend America,



   Alan M. Gottlieb


   Chairman, AmeriPAC






   If you prefer to send a check, please mail to:


American Political Action Committee (AmeriPAC)


PO Box 1682


Dept Code 4896-e-active


Bellevue, WA 98009-1682




Paid for by AmeriPAC, a federally-authorized and  qualified multi candidate
political action committee. Not authorized by any  candidate or candidate's
committee. Contributions to AmeriPAC will be used in  connection with federal
elections. Maximum contribution per individual per  calendar year is $5,000.
Contributions from foreign nationals and corporations  are prohibited.
Contributions are not deductible for federal income tax purposes.

Copyright © 2012 AmeriPAC,

   All Rights Reserved.





Forward this Email to a Friend










             This email was sent to freedom@... by
patriot@.... To ensure delivery of emails to your inbox, please add
patriot@... to your address book or safe sender list. Learn more.
If you are having trouble viewing this email, click here.
              


              


              to Unsubscribe to future emails. To Report Abuse click here.

              


              


             PO Box 1682 Bellvue, WA 98009




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/the-president-cant-increase-congresss-power-simpl\
y-by-signing-a-treaty/
CategoriesArchivesBlog Home Next: Kozinski on Privacy at Constitution
DayPrevious: English Fluency? Correct Pronunciation? Why Would Teachers Need
Those?The President Can�t Increase Congress�s Power Simply by Signing a
TreatyPosted by Ilya ShapiroA lost episode of Jerry Springer found its way into
the Supreme Court�s 2010-11 term in the case of United States v. Bond. Mrs.
Bond, upset by the pregnancy that resulted from an affair between her husband
and her erstwhile best friend, decided to take revenge. A trained microbiologist
working at a chemical manufacturer, Mrs. Bond tried to poison her husband�s
mistress by dusting her door knobs, mailbox, and car handles with dangerous,
possibly lethal chemicals.Upon being caught by (federal) postal inspectors, Mrs.
Bond was charged with violating the law Congress passed to implement an
international chemical weapons treaty. (There are no generally applicable
federal attempted murder statutes, so prosecutors had to get creative to remain
in federal court.)But if general criminal statutes are beyond Congress�s powers,
as even the most ardent federal-power activist must acknowledge, how did
Congress have the power to pass the law that ensnared Mrs. Bond? � who, whatever
her character flaws, was not selling chemical weapons to terrorists (the
treaty�s target). Mrs. Bond thus hoped to challenge her conviction by arguing
that Congress did not have the power to pass the law in question.The Third
Circuit, however, ruled that she did not have standing � a legal doctrine
defining who has the right to bring a claim � to challenge the law on federalism
grounds. Cato filed a Supreme Court brief supporting Mrs. Bond�s position and
arguing that it makes no sense to deny standing to someone challenging a law
under which she is being prosecuted. The Court unanimously agreed and remanded
the case back to the Third Circuit, to finally hear arguments over whether the
statute is beyond congressional power.Cato has now reentered the fray, in a
brief authored by Georgetown law professor Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz and joined
by the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence. We again support Mrs. Bond�s
claim that the law under which she was charged is beyond Congress�s enumerated
powers. The main obstacle to this argument is the 1920 case Missouri v. Holland,
a short and not completely clear opinion by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes that
has been interpreted to mean that Congress can expand its enumerated powers via
the Treaty Clause.In other words, even though Congress does not have the power
to pass, for example, general criminal statutes, if Congress ratifies a treaty
calling for such statutes, its power increases beyond constitutional limits. We
argue that this is an astounding manner in which to interpret a Constitution
that creates a federal government of limited powers. Not only would this mean
that the Executive has the ability to expand congressional power by signing a
treaty, but it would mean that foreign governments could change congressional
power by abrogating a previously valid treaty � thus removing the constitutional
authority from certain laws. We also point out how the most influential argument
supporting Missouri v. Holland is based on a clear misreading of constitutional
history and that the ruling is in deep tension with other cases.On the treaty
power, we�re in a constitutional quagmire that can only be escaped by limiting
or overturning Missouri v. Holland.  The Third Circuit can�t itself overturn a
Supreme Court decision, of course, but it follows our brief, it can at least
limit its damage.Ilya Shapiro � September 26, 2011 @ 8:40 am
Filed under: Government and Politics; Law and Civil Liberties
Tags: 10th amendment, amicus briefs, bond, executive branch, federalism, tenth
amendment, treaties,treaty power PrintShareThisCato Institute HomeContact Cato @
LibertyCato Unbound - Leading Thinkers, Big IdeasFree Newsletters from
CatoSocial Media Cato on Facebook Cato on Twitter Cato on Google+ Cato on
YouTubeSyndicate RSSCustomize your Cato @ Liberty RSS feedReceive Cato @ Liberty
posts via email:Delivered by FeedBurner

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

http://akiu.net/ichitaro/wp-content/uploads/fgallery/site.php?plain128.jpeg

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I read your profile today, I thought I would drop you a line and hope to become
your friend! Check my personal page here:
http://ldbills.zoomshare.com/files/photos.htm

Know that Iran has attacked NObody!� Israel has attacked EVERYbody including the
U.S. MORE than TWICE!� (U.S.S. Liberty, 911, U.S.S. Cole etc.) ALL FALSE FLAG
ATTACKS BY OUR ALLY!
�
Iran planning attacks on U.S. targets in Turkey
Tags:

COVER-UP/DECEPTIONS/PROPAGANDA
IRAN
ISRAEL
TURKEY


Webmaster's Commentary:�


"And Iran will tear the tags off of their seat cushions, and the wings off of
butterflies! Iran will be cruel to animals. Iran will illegally copy old TV
shows! Iran smells bad and dresses funny!"
(ahem)
Obviously Israel is not happy that the EU yanked the rug out from under the
sanctions, which derailed the plan to provoke Iran over the Straight of Hormuz.
So, Israel is trying to find some other means to trigger a war with Iran, a war
that Americans children will be blown to bits trying to finish.
�
http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/report-iran-planning-attacks-on-u-s-targ\
ets-in-turkey-1.407860

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Socialism In Economic Sector,Capitalism In Government Spells Ruin-By Harsha
Sankar






       Dear Citizen,                          April 1996


The
  Line-Item veto was finally given to the President after elected
congresspeople passed it.  The Federal Employees Credit Union Files
suit, hoping a judge will overturn it.

In California,
proposition 187, is passed by an overwhelming majority of its citizens.
It was a referendum denying taxpayer funded benefits to people who are
in this nation illegally.  So what? A judge overturns it immediately due
  to special interests pressure.

In Alabama,Justice Mark Kennedy
overturned laws placing caps on punitive damages because it was
unpopular with the trial attorneys who argued their cases before him
despite the fact most Alabamians held these laws in high regard.

The
  Supreme Court struck down a meaningful law that would have established a
  limit on what any prospective federal legislative, executive and
judgeship candidate could spend on his or her campaign. They declare
this law is a violation of the Free Speech Amendment even though these
prospects seek a public office with public responsibility.

This
“Judicial activism” is paralyzing the government and is paralyzing
America. On the pretext of Constitution protectionism, many judges
(State and Federal) are wielding veto power in such a promiscuous
fashion that they are acting as monarchs.  In reality, their actions are
  destroying the very principles of democracy on which this nation was
formed. This process insulta the intelligence and integrity of the
average, hardworking voter as it deprives them of their rights and gives
  too much power to the Courts,lawyers,lobbyists and to the big
corporations who can afford these “mouthpieces” in legislative,
executive and judicial halls of government.

The U.S
Constitution does not give power for federal courts to make laws or
dictate policy to either government or private agencies. However, this
is taking place now, as outrageous amounts of money, are being awarded.
Marginal lawbreakers and perpetrators of victimless crimes are being
punished severely and violent offenders and criminals who injure people
by committing massive theft and fraud receive light sentences.

Many
  federal and state judges have seized too much power at the working
people’s expense. It is costing America in terms of tax dollars, public
safety and personal freedoms. One glaring example of this waste was the
$100 million spent of taxpayers' dollars on the Rodney King civil rights
  matter.

It is simply no wonder that our laws are no longer black
  and white,that they are instead voluminous,nebulous and therefore
meaningless.The rule of the law has now given in to the rule of the
lawyers.State judges who run for office receive huge campaign
contributions from the trial lawyers who argue their cases in their
presence.Other state judges who do not have to seek direct election are
reconfirmed by the Bar Association.Federal judges are appointed for
life.In any set up, judges are not accountable to the general public.

The incentive is too great for judges to cater to the interests of the few as
Middle America shoulders this burden.

The
  only way for productive Americans to stem this rot is to contact their
elected officials and tell them to support reconfirmation of judges by
elected officials only at least once every ten years. All are urged to
call 1-202-224-3121 and voice their support for H.J. Resolution 63,
which proposes to do just that. More importantly, urgency is required by
  people to support campaign finance reform and H.R 2566. This rot
originates from the present campaign finance system.

This letter
has been written to garner support for true campaign finance reform.
The way campaigns are financed presently is polluting the political
system, destroying representative government, and is giving undue power
to the lawyers, lobbyists, bureaucrats, union management, corporate
executives, and other special interests.  It is not possible for this
nation to achieve much needed and overdue reforms in this legal and
healthcare systems without limits on what people can contribute directly
  to campaigns. A common argument given by opponents of true campaign
finance reform is that spending limits and limits on contributions to
political campaigns are an infringement to free speech, which is
stipulated in the First Amendment of the Constitution. While many people
  who advocate this point do not have ulterior motives, this position is
often maintained as a guise and trojan horse to preserve the present
corrupt atatus quo, which now and has been growing at a alarming rate
for the last ten years.

True freedom of one person or group of
people can never come at the expense of others and vice versa. Freedom
does not mean freedom to do wrong. The freedom to buy government for
gain (personal or ideological)is wrong. This exercise of power is not
practicing freedom. It prevents equal access to government by other
groups and individuals.

A constitutional government’s chief
trademark is the one-man vote concept. This is the very foundation on
which this nation was founded and the Bill of Rights framed.
People,regardless of wealth and background,should voice their rights and
  responsibilities at the ballot box. Government should not be subject to
  the marketplace unlike free markets and enterprise. Government is a
social responsibility and should not auctioned off to the highest bidder
  seeking public office. The three branches of government is a public
responsibility and it should not be handled by capitalists in the
private sector. Mammoth contributions to political campaigns are merely
investments or to put it bluntly, bribes.  While capitalism works best
in all economic activity, socialism should prevail in government as
government should treat all equally.

                             Very Truly Yours,

                             Harsha Sankar
                             Virginia

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Justice Should Never Be A Marketable Item-By Harsha Sankar







Dear Citizen,             May 1996

Everybody
  in society feels they are entitled to free goods from government.  The
question that is often asked is, “Does government owe its citizens a
job, housing, health care, education, pensions and other goods and
services?” The answer should be a resounding no.

Does that mean
government owes nothing to its citizens? The answer to that is obviously
  no.Therefore,“What does government owe its citizens and residents?” The
  correct answer is very simple.

In the Declaration of
Independence, it is clearly stated that citizens have the right to
life,liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Translation:All fundamental
and basic rights must be afforded to all citizens of this nation in the
same manner and in equal proportion. While this sounds elementary, these
  principles are abided by too infrequently. Preferred justice is no
justice at all.

People look to government to be the provider of
numerous services termed social responsibilities. Government should be
to society as a referee is to a group of athletes. The referee is a
neutral impartial body who, after being appointed by the participants
(or its representatives), makes sure that all tights of all participants
  are protected in full and that no participant violates the rights of
another participant. The referee does not engage in the sport. The
referee does not take into consideration the records, background,
wealth, ace, education, religion, accomplishments, age and stature of
any person participating in a sporting event. If the referee takes these
  factors into consideration, the result of  this is that preferential
treatment or discrimination is meted out to a participant.  An action
like this destroys the integrity of the game.No player and his or her
representative negotiates with the referee. The referee cannot be used
or manipulated by any force. The rulings of the referee are binding to
all who engage in that sporting event.  The referee has to keep things
in proper perspective in order for the game to flow in a smooth,
efficient and proper manner.While the referee may not be perfect,that
person is best suited,as deemed by the participants,to enforce rules
agreed to by every one. Government needs to be understood in this
analogous context.

  The only social responsibility that
should be in existence is total protection of the inalienable rights of
its people. People should have their rights protected without having to
spend any out-of-pocket money.  That should be the primary reason why
people should pay taxes. It is simply ridiculous that people spend
enormous amounts extra on a service that government should provide for
free. Why should justice be so expensive? After all, the rights of the
individual become hardly inalienable when there is a price tag on
it. While capitalism and free markets are the best systems in the
provision of goods and services, the provision of justice is a social
responsibility and should never be influence by capital.  Justice should
  never be a marketable item.


                                       Harsha Sankar
                                       Virginia

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- On Tue, 1/17/12, Pat Rylance <prylance@...> wrote:

From: Pat Rylance <prylance@...>

















�









       Even IF you don't have children in school today, chances are you have
grandchildren attending.�� This needs to go to the US Supreme Court wher
by all rights it should be overturned.� And what of parents rights to attend
school board meetings in support or to complain of any activity or teachings at
the school?� Time to start homeschooling!!!
Pat


--- peri.mcmillan@... wrote:

From: "Peri Mcmillan" <peri.mcmillan@...>
To: <"Undisclosed-Recipient:;>"@NONE>
Subject: VDW/ED:  Parents of 50 Million U.S. Children Soon to Lose  Parental
Rights
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 13:19:38 -0800



OMG! Hope you don't have kids or grandkids in
school today.
�
----- Original Message -----
From: W.G.E.N.

To: idzrus@...
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 1:14 PM
Subject: VDW/ED: Parents of 50 Million U.S. Children Soon to Lose
Parental Rights

From: "Carmen Reynolds" <journalist@...>
To:
"'W.G.E.N.'" <idzrus@...>
Subject:
Parents of 50 Million U.S. Children Soon to Lose Parental Rights
Date: Mon,
16 Jan 2012 15:01:28 -0600


http://www.boogai.net/top-story/parents-of-50-million-u-s-children-soon-to-lose-\
parental-rights/

�
Parents of 50 Million U.S. Children Soon to Lose Parental
Rights


By Parental Rights.org
If your children attend public school, you
are among those parents whose rights will end the moment your child enters the
school. In 2005 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found in Fields v.
Palmdale School District that the Meyer-Pierce right [of parents to
direct the upbringing of their children] does not exist beyond the threshold of
the school door.
You read that right. The court originally held that
Parental Rights [do] not exist beyond the threshold of the school
door.
That line was so starkly offensive that it was edited out during an
en banc review of the case, but the decision itself was retained,
including the following:
We conclude that the parents are possessed of no
constitutional right to prevent the public schools from providing
information on the subject [of sexuality] to their students in any forum or
manner they select (emphasis added).
Of course, most parents contend
they dont have a choice in where their children are schooled. Either economic
constraints or personal circumstances leave them with no practical alternative
to the local public school. And that leaves no parental rights at
all.
Please act to reverse this assault by big government courts against
parental rights. Sign the
petition and get more information at ParentalRights.org.
Then, please
pass this on. Every parent of a public school student needs to know the extent
to which the courts have robbed them of their rights. Add
this message to your Facebook account, or
it on virtually any other social network.
While the Parental
Rights Amendment will not give parents any greater power to control the
schools choice of curriculum, it will protect their right to pull their
individual child out of any program of an outrageous or offensive nature, like
the program in the Palmdale case. (To read more from this case, click
here.)
Boogai: You MUST watch this VIDEO to understand what we are up
against. My Two Dads
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuSc_U5VqDQ&feature=autoplay&list=UUqAGZc8EbJBKjZ\
I_FqjmI3w&playnext=1

�


�


















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 




































Dear Citizen,                                            
          October 1994 


 

Governor George Allen has proved to be
an ambitious administrator in his
first year in office. He has proposed radical changes that will
revamp
and restructure the role of state government and how it is
funded. However,Governor Allen has demonstrated the
inability to prioritize
and put things in perspective. He also has shown he lacks understanding on
how wealth is created and on what government’s role in society should be.

 

Governor Allen’s initiatives and
proposals can be summed up in two ways:

 

1)     
He
wants to cut social services and aid in order to provide tax cuts.

2)   He
wants to deregulate business and reduce the power of government agencies that
regulate it.

 

While the second initiative is
essential for the creation of economic
opportunities, the first will present
obstacles in the path of empowerment
and social mobility. Moreover, even though it is widely agreed
that
big government is regressive, for anyone to simply cut services (even
though
inefficiently administrated) benefiting the needy just to provide tax
relief to
high–income people (regardless of whether they are productive)
is
inhumane.  Although the Governor is
correct to eliminate or decrease
funding for pork-barrel projects, his plan to
reduce aid to the
disenfranchised without tackling the waste government
produces in the
private sector will only cause deep resentment and class
warfare. 

Government has two domestic
requirements it needs to fulfill in society.
One of those is the provision of a safety net so that people in strife
will
have access to the bare necessities.

 

The other is total,unequivocal,and
equal protection of the basic
rights of Virginians. Reforming the legal system which enables the
parasitic forces in society to drain vast amounts of capital from
productive
Virginians should instead be a top item on the Governor’s
agenda. 

Governor Allen’s constituents spend in excess
of three billion dollars annually
in lawyer fees alone. That figure itself exceeds the amount of tax
revenue collected by this Commonwealth yearly. This dollar figure
also
represents the amount of money Virginians are blackmailed by its
three branches of government to
pay lawyers in order to avoid punishment
or forfeiture of their basic
rights.  That is where the true welfare
lies.  The
amount of money spent to
assist the economically deprived
(even though yielding a low rate of return)
pales in comparison to the
figure just quoted.

 

If Governor Allen would just take
necessary steps to assist his constituents
in obtaining justice without having
to foot such an expensive bill, these
actions alone would truly reform the welfare
system. People would not
need welfare
because the abundance of new capital that would be available
for investment (instead
of currently being sucked up) would expand
enormously the rate of productivity
and economic growth. This would
give Virginians the opportunities they deserve.

 

Governor Allen must come to the
realization that people afflicted with poverty
are not the cause of poverty,
but rather are the victims instead. The
answer
to this strife is legal reform.

                                   Very Truly
Yours,
                                    Harsha
Sankar                                   
Virginia













































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 

































Dear Citizen,                                            
          October 1994 


 

Governor George Allen has proved to be
an ambitious administrator in his
first year in office. He has proposed radical changes that will
revamp
and restructure the role of state government and how it is
funded. However,Governor Allen has demonstrated the
inability to prioritize
and put things in perspective. He also has shown he lacks understanding on
how wealth is created and on what government’s role in society should be.

 

Governor Allen’s initiatives and
proposals can be summed up in two ways:

 

1) He
wants to cut social services and aid in order to provide tax cuts.

2)  He
wants to deregulate business and reduce the power of government agencies that
regulate it.

 

While the second initiative is
essential for the creation of economic
opportunities, the first will present
obstacles in the path of empowerment
and social mobility. Moreover, even though it is widely agreed
that
big government is regressive, for anyone to simply cut services (even
though
inefficiently administrated) benefiting the needy just to provide tax
relief to
high–income people (regardless of whether they are productive)
is
inhumane.  Although the Governor is
correct to eliminate or decrease
funding for pork-barrel projects, his plan to
reduce aid to the
disenfranchised without tackling the waste government
produces in the
private sector will only cause deep resentment and class
warfare. 

Government has two domestic
requirements it needs to fulfill in society.
One of those is the provision of a safety net so that people in strife
will
have access to the bare necessities.

 

The other is total,unequivocal,and
equal protection of the basic
rights of Virginians. Reforming the legal system which enables the
parasitic forces in society to drain vast amounts of capital from
productive
Virginians should instead be a top item on the Governor’s
agenda. 

Governor Allen’s constituents spend in excess
of three billion dollars annually
in lawyer fees alone. That figure itself exceeds the amount of tax
revenue collected by this Commonwealth yearly. This dollar figure
also
represents the amount of money Virginians are blackmailed by its
three branches of government to
pay lawyers in order to avoid punishment
or forfeiture of their basic
rights.  That is where the true welfare
lies.  The
amount of money spent to
assist the economically deprived
(even though yielding a low rate of return)
pales in comparison to the
figure just quoted.

 

If Governor Allen would just take
necessary steps to assist his constituents
in obtaining justice without having
to foot such an expensive bill, these
actions alone would truly reform the welfare
system. People would not
need welfare
because the abundance of new capital that would be available
for investment (instead
of currently being sucked up) would expand
enormously the rate of productivity
and economic growth. This would
give Virginians the opportunities they deserve.

 

Governor Allen must come to the
realization that people afflicted with poverty
are not the cause of poverty,
but rather are the victims instead. The
answer
to this strife is legal reform.

                                   Very Truly
Yours,
                                    Harsha
Sankar                                   
Virginia


























































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 











	  Ushering The Police State Via Military-By Harsha Sankar






       Dear Citizen,                  December 2011


       As the rolls of the Bar Association attorneys continue to swell,
one can continue to
expect more oppressive and repressive legislation to
  be enacted that continue to
deprive more and more Americans of their
rights.

       The U.S. Senate is expecting to pass S.1867, which
is the National Defense
Authorization Act. This bill gives policing
power to the Department of Defense.
The military can


       1. Indefinitely detain American citizens and lawful resident
aliens throughout
the globe, including on American soil itself. There
need not be a speedy trial and
Habeas Corpus is suspended.

       2. Engage in police work on American soil. This effectively repeals Posse
Comitatus.



       This could be quite reminiscent of the Stalinist Soviet Union or
Nazi Germany
where a knock on the door in the middle of the night meant
that the person taken
by the military was often never seen again. This
measure’s detention principles are
similar to the ones that sent
innocent Japanese-Americans into concentration camps during WW II.

             This bill has already been passed in the House of Representatives
with nary a
whimper by a 322-96 vote.


               Senators Lindsey Graham(R-SC) and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH)
state that America
is part of the battlefield and this bill is
necessary. This bill is over 600 pages long and
is an attorneys' boon.
It is totally unfocused, directionless, and wide-ranging. Only
the
attorney profession will be allowed to give it substance on an ad hoc
basis.

               Those are well-connected within the legal
  system may not have fear of this bill.
However, most who are approached
by the military, under the banner of this law,
must be the most
apprehensive.

               This bill, because of the lobbyist
setup of rules and standards of protocols in
Congress, is not even a
stand-alone bill. The Senate Armed Services Committee
brought this as
part of the military authorization bill. It should be the subject of its

own bill.

                Now is the time of Americans to
galvanize the support of the local police and of
the military to support
  a constitutional amendment calling for the ban of
same-hands
governance. The presence of attorneys in office is unwarranted and
is
highly destructive to representative governance.



                 Very Truly Yours,

                 Harsha Sankar
                 908 Valley Ridge Road
                 Covington, Virginia 24426























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 16:05:14 -0500
From: tactics@...
To: gsgkill@...
Subject: How to Read the Law

















Tips & Tactics

January 19, 2012
© 1997-2012 by Jurisdictionary ® ...
All Rights Reserved












How to Read the Law ...

( From "How to Win in Court" Course )

   Click or Call 866-LAW-EASY Toll Free!


Know What the Law Actually Says and Means!
One of the biggest case-losing mistakes is mis-reading the law.

   Constitutions
   Rules
   Statutes
   Codes
   Court Rulings
   Other Legal Documents

If you don't know what a law actually says, you'll have a devilishly
   hard time getting a judge to agree with you!
Understanding the "rules of language interpretation" is essential ... not only
to winning lawsuits but to obtain success in other pursuits of life as well.
Legal language must be interpreted according to the "rules of language
interpretation".
Understanding the rules of language interpretation are
   vital to winning your case. You DO want to win, don't you?
Too many otherwise clever people "assume" they know what a law says, when the
only opinion
   that counts in court is what appellate justices say the law says.
Appellate justices apply the rules of language interpretation. You must
   also!
Learn the rules ... if you want to win!
For example, one of the principles rules is the "Plain
   Meaning Rule".
   This rule requires judges to give words their "plain
   meaning", i.e., what an ordinary reasonable person would believe a word means
   in the context where it's found.
  You must never let a judge or opposing party or his lawyer to play games
   with words. Knowing these rules (more completely explained in my course) gives
you the knowledge-power you need to put a stop to the word games!
If a reasonable person would read "bicycle" to
   mean a two-wheeled vehicle powered only by legs and feet, no judge
   or lawyer should be allowed to stretch the meaning to include mopeds or
motorcycles.
Judges and lawyers should be compelled to agree that a law says "plainly" what
it says and that it means it.
Sometimes judges and lawyers  twist words
   to reach an outcome they desire. YOU must know these rules so you can put a
stop to it before it causes you to lose your
case!
So? What if the meaning is plain but the context is confusing?
Other rules (explained in my course) give clear direction.
For example, according to the  rule of "ejusdem
     generis" (simply Latin for  "of
   the same type"),  general terms
   at the end of specific lists include only things of the same type as those
   specifically mentioned in the list. If a provision lists "oranges,
   grapefruit, lemons, and
   other fruit", the doctrine of ejusdem generis limits the
   phrase "other fruit" to mean other citrus fruit. Apples
   and pears are not included. One may assume the provision includes other
citrus, e.g., kumquats, limes, tangelos, etc. However, strawberries and grapes
are not included. The term ejusdem generis means, in essence, of the same type.
You need to know this stuff ... if you want to win!
To learn more,  order my affordable, official 24-hour Jurisdictionary "How to
Win in Court" self-help
   course and get your competitive edge ... before
   it's too late.
www.Jurisdictionary.com
See what users are saying ⇒




   Click HERE to earn "Easy Money" !
   Receive THOUSANDS monthly.
   Post your affiliate link in all your outgoing email signatures, on social
networking sites, in blogs, on web pages, and everywhere you can post it.
   This is "Easy Money" ... and there's no limit to what you can earn.
Affiliate sign-up is completely FREE.
   How much will  YOU be paid  each month?
   1-2 sales earn 10% so 2 sales pay $49/month
   3-5 sales earn  15% so  5 sales  pay $186/month
   6-10 sales earn  20% so 10 sales pay $498/month
   11-20 sales earn 25% so 20 sales pay $1,245/month
    21-30 sales earn 30% so 30 sales pay $2,241/month
   31-50 sales earn 35% so  50 sales pay $4,357/month
   51+Â sales earn 40% so  200 sales pays $19,920/month
   A Quarter-Million Dollars each year for 200 sales/month!

     And there's NO LIMIT! You can earn even MORE!!
   Click HERE to sign up now!






Help Your Friends!

     Forward this email so your friends can get the free

    Basic Lawsuit Flowchart






Affordable 24-hour Step-by-Step Self-Help Course Includes:



5-hour video CD simplifies the process of litigation

2 audio CDs present practical tactics and procedures

15 in-depth tutorials on a 4th CD lay out the basics

Free EasyGuide to the Rules of Court

Instant On-Line Access while CDs are in the Mail

Still Only $249 ... plus $7.50 Priority Mail Shipping & Handling

Save legal fees! Control judges!

Defeat crooked lawyers!



www.Jurisdictionary.com



Ask anyone who has our course ... "Jurisdictionary Works!"



Call Toll Free for details: 866-Law-Easy









				 Great Stuff!

... Michael C.



				 I won an $11,000 lawsuit and defeated a credit card bank by  using the
methods in your Jurisdictionary course. I was amazed how easy it is to
understand! It gave me confidence, and on 12 May 2011 I  won! The bank's case
was   dismissed with prejudice! Your course is great. Thank you for making a
great course. I got back much more than the cost of it. I understand about the
judicial system. I am now confident. I got back my dignity! God bless you!

... Reynaldo N.


... Mundelein



				 I bought your course, and it paid off!

... Ruben P.


... Miami, Florida



				 Settled my case! Without your course I would never have gotten to 1st base.

... Larry S.


... Orlando, Florida



				 I ordered  your course several weeks ago and am really enjoying the fact
that I  understand the legal process better than I ever thought I could.   Your
materials and teaching style are great and very easy to follow.

... Allan D.


... Brainerd, Minnesota



				 Won unemployment benefits hearing on my own. Without   your Jurisdictionay
training, I would not have been effective. The course paid for itself. Your 
course is a blessing.

... Ben J.


... Los Angeles



				 The best  investment I ever made was your self-help law course. My $250 
investment gained me a $216,000 return!  I sued my  former employer for
violating my software copyright. I presented my case  to more than a few
lawyers, but all turned me down. They were  too frightened to take on a 'big and
powerful' corporation. After nearly giving up, I  found your course. Winning my
case gave me confidence that you are right. We can win, if the law is on our
side,  regardless of how powerful our opponents may be. Our liberty really is in
the law in the first place. Your course gives the common man power he  would not
otherwise have.

... Patrick D.



				 My attorney kept me  in the dark but from your course I learned enough to
realize he was  trying to take my real estate for himself, and I circumvented
him thanks to you!

... Anthony A.


... Decatur, Alabama



				 This information should be at everyone's disposal.

... Kevin H.



				 I have your course. I wish I had a picture of the opposing attorney when I
objected to his attempt to get an affidavit admitted! Thanks!

... BJ H


... Pasadena, Maryland



				 Thanks for your tutorial "Evidence Made Easy". The way you explain the rules
is so effective that we pro se plaintiffs have confidence in our fight for
what's right.

... Arcenio A.



				 Since learning from your course my life has changed for the better, and I am
finally in control of my formerly overwhelming legal problems.

... Harold C.


... Jersey City, New Jersey











     © 1997-2012 by Jurisdictionary ® ...
All Rights Reserved

     c/o Dr. Frederick D. Graves, JD

     621 Howard Creek Lane

     Stuart, Florida  34994
     Toll Free: 866-Law-Easy ( 866-529-3279 )




	 To be removed click HERE.







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 











--- On Tue, 1/24/12, Grassfire Nation <alert@...> wrote:









					 From the Desk of:

					 Steve Elliott, Grassfire Nation




					 Yesterday, the Supreme Court refused to hear oral arguments on whether
Justice Elena Kagan should recuse herself from the ObamaCare lawsuit.

					 This was no surprise. The Supreme Court is the most isolated and powerful
branch of government. Despite the overwhelming evidence indicating that Kagan
should recuse herself, the Court has refused to take any action.

					 Let’s review the facts…

					 The Judicial Crisis Network (JCN) has carefully documented Kagan’s work
on behalf of ObamaCare while she served as Obama’s Solicitor General.

					 **According to JCN, Kagan engaged her department in the strategy to defend
ObamaCare in court “before [ObamaCare] had even been signed into law.”  So
Kagan was an advocate for ObamaCare even before the final votes were cast.

					 **JCN also tracks how Kagan was involved in the “deliberative process”
for her office’s legal defense of ObamaCare. By definition, this means Kagan
has knowledge of information (i.e. the Administration’s deliberative process)
which is protected and therefore the other justices may not be allowed to hear!

					 Go here to access JCN’s full report:

					 http://www.grassfire.com/161/petition.asp

					 It is clear that Elena Kagan was an open advocate of ObamaCare and that, in
her position as Solicitor General, she was involved in defending the
legislation.

					 By any judicial ethical standards, she should recuse herself.

					 But now her colleagues on the Supreme Court are “circling the wagons”
to protect their elevated station in our society!

					 But this goes beyond her personal sense of ethics…

					 THIS IS THE LAW OF THE LAND!

					 Federal law (28 U.S.C. 455) clearly stipulates the grounds for judges to
disqualify themselves in cases, including if the judge’s “impartiality might
reasonably be questioned” or if the judge served in federal office as
“counsel” or “adviser” or “expressed an opinion” on a matter.

					 Kagan has crossed all these lines and by law she must recuse herself for
the ObamaCare case -- something she has already done dozens of times on other
cases. But for ObamaCare, Obama’s hand-picked advocate refuses to step aside.

					 To make matters worse, much of the facts of Kagan’s open advocacy on
behalf of ObamaCare was not disclosed during her confirmation hearings and has
only come to light in the last few weeks after repeated Freedom of Information
Act inquiries.

					 The Obama team hid the facts of Kagan’s ObamaCare advocacy!

					 + + Immediate Action Needed

					 Grassfire Nation has launched a national petition calling on Justice Kagan
to recuse herself form the ObamaCare case or to be disqualified by appropriate
legal means. Already, more than 20,000 citizens have signed. Now, with the
Supreme Court “circling the wagons,” it’s time for grassroots citizens to
let their voice be heard:

					 Please go here now to sign the petition:

					 http://www.grassfire.com/161/petition.asp

					 We have posted links to resources, including JCN’s excellent report, so
you can study up on this very important issue.

					 Again… we are just weeks away from the most important legal showdown in
years. And as it stands right now, Obama’s hand-picked justice -- who openly
supported ObamaCare -- could cast the deciding vote.

					 Thank you for taking a stand!

					 Steve Elliott

					 Grassfire Nation

					 P.S. We cannot allow Obama’s hand-picked advocate of his ObamaCare law to
cast what could be the deciding vote on ObamaCare. Sign the petition today:

					 http://www.grassrootsaction.com/r.asp?U=67737

					 +   +  +   +   +   +   +   +   +   +  +  +   +  
+   +   +   +

					 (Note: Please do not "reply" directly to this e-mail message. This e-mail
address is not designed to receive your personal messages. To contact Grassfire
Nation with comments, questions or to change your status, see link at the end.)

					 + + + + +

					 Grassfire Nation, a division of Grassroots Action, Inc., is a
million-strong network of grassroots conservatives that is dedicated to
equipping you with the tools that give you a realimpact on the key issues of our
day.  Copyright 2011 Grassroots Action, Inc.

					 + + Comments? Questions?

					 http://www.grassrootsaction.com/r.asp?U=67738

					 + +

					 Technical questions only:  For technical questions regarding this email,
go here:  (Not for comments/feedback on this update)

					 http://www.grassrootsaction.com/r.asp?U=67739

					 + + + + +"


























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Occupy JAIL
Civil disobediencebecomes a sacred duty when the state has become lawless or
corrupt.

When injustice becomes law, rebellion becomes duty

Section 61 of the Magna Carta provided that if the King (John) did not follow
the provisions of the charter, the Barons should have a right to correct the
King by force until the King should begin to follow the articles of the
charter.[13] Thus the right of lawful revolution was born into the
constitutional law of England. This is of major import because without the right
to revolt there is less reason to preserve the right to bear arms. This
particular portion of the carta has been reaffirmed as were the regulations
concerning the bearing of arms and tenure by serjeanty.[14]

It was also recognized at an early date that the society had certain rights
against being terrorized by those going armed. The Statute of Northampton (1328)
made it illegal to ride in the darkness armed with a dangerous weapon and
terrorizing the people.[15] Thus the right to bear arms for the purpose of
self-defense and revolution were not impeded, but the "police power" to limit
the use of weapons was recognized.

http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Hays1.htm

Our notions, indeed, of the dangers of standing armies, in time of peace are
derived in a great measure from the principles and examples of our English
ancestors. In England, the king possessed the power of raising standing armies
in time of peace according to his own pleasure. And this perogative was justly
esteemed dangerous to the public liberties. Upon the revolution of 1688
Parliament wisely insisted upon a bill of rights, which should furnish an
adequate security for the future.[19]
In addition to the right of revolution is the right of personal self-defense.
Without this basic right there would be no reason for man to bear arms. The
right to bear arms must therefore draw its strength from the rights of man to
resort to force when law fails or an adequate remedy is not immediately
available to prevent the loss of human life.

The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign
invasions, domestic usurpation of power by rulers. It is against sound policy
for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies
in time of peace, both from the enormous expense with which they afford
ambitious and unprincipled rulers to subvert the government, or trammel upon the
rights of the people. The rights of the citizens to keep and bear arms, has
justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it
offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary powers of
rulers: and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance,
enable the people to resist and triumph over them.[33]

The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign
invasion, and domestic insurrection, and domestic usurpation of power by rulers.
It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large standing
armies…the right of the citizen to bear arms has been justly considered the
palladium of the liberties…[63]


________________________________
  From: "freedom@..." <freedom@...>
To: peoplebeforelawyers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 7:36 AM
Subject: [People B4 Lawyers] Court circles wagons to protect ObamaCare?


 


 

--- On Tue, 1/24/12, Grassfire Nation <alert@...> wrote:





From the Desk of:

Steve Elliott, Grassfire Nation




Yesterday, the Supreme Court refused to hear oral arguments on whether Justice
Elena Kagan should recuse herself from the ObamaCare lawsuit.

This was no surprise. The Supreme Court is the most isolated and powerful branch
of government. Despite the overwhelming evidence indicating that Kagan should
recuse herself, the Court has refused to take any action.

Let’s review the facts…

The Judicial Crisis Network (JCN) has carefully documented Kagan’s work on
behalf of ObamaCare while she served as Obama’s Solicitor General.

**According to JCN, Kagan engaged her department in the strategy to defend
ObamaCare in court “before [ObamaCare] had even been signed into law.”  So
Kagan was an advocate for ObamaCare even before the final votes were cast.

**JCN also tracks how Kagan was involved in the “deliberative process” for
her office’s legal defense of ObamaCare. By definition, this means Kagan has
knowledge of information (i.e. the Administration’s deliberative process)
which is protected and therefore the other justices may not be allowed to hear!

Go here to access JCN’s full report:

http://www.grassfire.com/161/petition.asp

It is clear that Elena Kagan was an open advocate of ObamaCare and that, in her
position as Solicitor General, she was involved in defending the legislation.

By any judicial ethical standards, she should recuse herself.

But now her colleagues on the Supreme Court are “circling the wagons” to
protect their elevated station in our society!

But this goes beyond her personal sense of ethics…

THIS IS THE LAW OF THE LAND!

Federal law (28 U.S.C. 455) clearly stipulates the grounds for judges to
disqualify themselves in cases, including if the judge’s “impartiality might
reasonably be questioned” or if the judge served in federal office as
“counsel” or “adviser” or “expressed an opinion” on a matter.

Kagan has crossed all these lines and by law she must recuse herself for the
ObamaCare case -- something she has already done dozens of times on other cases.
But for ObamaCare, Obama’s hand-picked advocate refuses to step aside.

To make matters worse, much of the facts of Kagan’s open advocacy on behalf of
ObamaCare was not disclosed during her confirmation hearings and has only come
to light in the last few weeks after repeated Freedom of Information Act
inquiries.

The Obama team hid the facts of Kagan’s ObamaCare advocacy!

+ + Immediate Action Needed

Grassfire Nation has launched a national petition calling on Justice Kagan to
recuse herself form the ObamaCare case or to be disqualified by appropriate
legal means. Already, more than 20,000 citizens have signed. Now, with the
Supreme Court “circling the wagons,” it’s time for grassroots citizens to
let their voice be heard:

Please go here now to sign the petition:

http://www.grassfire.com/161/petition.asp

We have posted links to resources, including JCN’s excellent report, so you
can study up on this very important issue.

Again… we are just weeks away from the most important legal showdown in years.
And as it stands right now, Obama’s hand-picked justice -- who openly
supported ObamaCare -- could cast the deciding vote.

Thank you for taking a stand!

Steve Elliott

Grassfire Nation

P.S. We cannot allow Obama’s hand-picked advocate of his ObamaCare law to cast
what could be the deciding vote on ObamaCare. Sign the petition today:

http://www.grassrootsaction.com/r.asp?U=67737

+   +  +   +   +   +   +   +   +   +  +  +   +   +  
+   +   +

(Note: Please do not "reply" directly to this e-mail message. This e-mail
address is not designed to receive your personal messages. To contact Grassfire
Nation with comments, questions or to change your status, see link at the end.)

+ + + + +

Grassfire Nation, a division of Grassroots Action, Inc., is a million-strong
network of grassroots conservatives that is dedicated to equipping you with the
tools that give you a realimpact on the key issues of our day.  Copyright 2011
Grassroots Action, Inc.

+ + Comments? Questions?

http://www.grassrootsaction.com/r.asp?U=67738

+ +

Technical questions only:  For technical questions regarding this email, go
here:  (Not for comments/feedback on this update)

http://www.grassrootsaction.com/r.asp?U=67739

+ + + + +"

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Occupy JAIL
Civil disobediencebecomes a sacred duty when the state has become lawless or
corrupt.

When injustice becomes law, rebellion becomes duty

Section 61 of the Magna Carta provided that if the King (John) did not follow
the provisions of the charter, the Barons should have a right to correct the
King by force until the King should begin to follow the articles of the
charter.[13] Thus the right of lawful revolution was born into the
constitutional law of England. This is of major import because without the right
to revolt there is less reason to preserve the right to bear arms. This
particular portion of the carta has been reaffirmed as were the regulations
concerning the bearing of arms and tenure by serjeanty.[14]

It was also recognized at an early date that the society had certain rights
against being terrorized by those going armed. The Statute of Northampton (1328)
made it illegal to ride in the darkness armed with a dangerous weapon and
terrorizing the people.[15] Thus the right to bear arms for the purpose of
self-defense and revolution were not impeded, but the "police power" to limit
the use of weapons was recognized.

http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Hays1.htm

Our notions, indeed, of the dangers of standing armies, in time of peace are
derived in a great measure from the principles and examples of our English
ancestors. In England, the king possessed the power of raising standing armies
in time of peace according to his own pleasure. And this perogative was justly
esteemed dangerous to the public liberties. Upon the revolution of 1688
Parliament wisely insisted upon a bill of rights, which should furnish an
adequate security for the future.[19]
In addition to the right of revolution is the right of personal self-defense.
Without this basic right there would be no reason for man to bear arms. The
right to bear arms must therefore draw its strength from the rights of man to
resort to force when law fails or an adequate remedy is not immediately
available to prevent the loss of human life.

The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign
invasions, domestic usurpation of power by rulers. It is against sound policy
for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies
in time of peace, both from the enormous expense with which they afford
ambitious and unprincipled rulers to subvert the government, or trammel upon the
rights of the people. The rights of the citizens to keep and bear arms, has
justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it
offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary powers of
rulers: and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance,
enable the people to resist and triumph over them.[33]

The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign
invasion, and domestic insurrection, and domestic usurpation of power by rulers.
It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large standing
armies…the right of the citizen to bear arms has been justly considered the
palladium of the liberties…[63]


________________________________

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- On Thu, 1/26/12, Ron Branson <VictoryUSA@...> wrote:







Dear Anonymous:

I have just read your email exposing the judicial system. What I find amazing is
not the information or facts you present, but the source of this email. It
states that this email is from the N.C. Democrats. Am I to believe that somehow
the Democratic Party of North Carolina has jumped into the issue of combating
judicial corruption? If so, that is newsworthy in and of itself, and I wish to
spread the word around.

I have read your personal experience in the courts, now tell me more about N.C.
Democrats, please.
I am Ron Branson of JAIL4judges.org, which effort was founded back in April 1995
exposing the judicial system. Please do get back to me.

Ron Branson
VictoryUSA@...





N C Democrats wrote:





To: � � �NCDP Chair David �Parker <DavidParker@...>




Date: �January 21, 2012 12:01 AM EST


Cc: � � �Honorable Governor Bev Perdue <Governor.Office@...>




[ OCCUPY NC COURTS] � What happens when Judges are crooked?


Ordinary folks know little about courts, perhaps having a traffic ticket to deal
with, if that. �They watch all the legal propaganda shows on TV that make Judges
and Lawyers seem they are on the side of Justice. �Nothing could be further from
the truth.


I'm old enough to remember when Perry Mason was on radio before TV, and I grew
up believing that all my classmate's friends in the town of Shelby who's Dad's
were Lawyers were super fine folks. �And, back then, most of them were, model
citizens and conscientious caretakers of their communities legal needs.
�Everyone of them an�Atticus�Finch�in the rough, waiting to shine.


To my dismay, I've lived long enough to see most Lawyers as Liars. �Lawyers are
the only class of people licensed by the State to tell lies in front of Judges,
with impunity. �But wait. �Surely the Judges are honest? �But, then, how could
that be possible, when all Judges are first Lawyers? �Lawyers do not take
courses to become Judges. �They just sign up to run in an election �-- often
time because they cannot make it as Lawyers and want a steady income without
much work -- voted onto the Bench by people who know nothing about them.
.
If Lawyers are Liars, and Judges are Lawyers, how can Courts be honest? �Every
NC Judge mentioned in this Indictment-- sitting or retired -- is a criminal,
guilty at least of the federal crime of Obstruction of Justice.
____________________________________


Today, Jan 21, 2012, is the 2nd Anniversary of the US Supreme Court Decision
called Citizens-United, where 5 Justices ruled that legal fictions created by
Lawyers, born of State Governments, called Corporations, are man-made Super
People, with more rights than ordinary God-made American citizens, born of
women. �It's how Corporate Fascism has crept in to displace democracy in
America. �It's really quite simple:


Governments run by the people are called democracies.
Governments run by Corporations are called fascist.


And Judges who willingly enable larceny and murder are called criminals.


North Carolina is loaded with them. �And criminal Judges and Lawyers have taken
over the State Agencies who are supposed to protect citizens from abuse by them.


For instance: �The NC State Bar is supposed to protect the public from crooked
Lawyers, by stripping them of their License to practice law. �But the State Bar
refuses to accept Complaints against Lawyers, simply ignores them. �The State
Bar has become a protection racket for Lawyers vs the public. �Not surprisingly,
the State Bar General Counsel (that means the Bar's Lawyers) are also guilty of
Obstruction of Justice.


And a little known Agency called Judicial Standards Commission is equally
worthless. �It rejects Complaints, regulates no Judges, is just another office
full of people collecting State paychecks for doing nothing. �The JSC Executive
Director, Paul Ross, is a Lawyer who is guilty of Obstruction of Justice. �The
Commission�members are part civilian, part Lawyers. �Lawyers on the JSC are all
guilty of Obstruction of Justice, and shall be permanently disbarred. �The
others will just be fired and jailed.
____________________________________


If all Lawyers are criminals, and all Judges -- up to and including all Justices
on the NC Supreme Court -- are criminals, and all employed by State Regulating
Agencies are criminals, then who is left to prosecute crime, and to permanently
disbar Lawyers for life?


That was the conundrum I discovered while I was sitting in a jail some 2000
yards from my home ( with leaves down now, I can see it from my bedroom window,
thru gray tree twigs. �I welcome the green curtain of Spring, anytime now). �


I was arrested just before the 2010 election, to shut me up, by the same
State-employed criminals who had stolen everything I owned, including my garden
in Eden -- in Rockingham County NC, back on the day after Independence Day 2006
-- and including all my personal and business property. �Their intention was
this: if they stole everything I had to earn a living with, I would die. �Hence
the charges against them are the felonies of grand larceny and attempted murder.


I had been exposing these criminals by writing about what they did, as I
discovered it, having finally realized that 8 of these Felons were on the Ballot
for re-election in Nov 2010. �That's why I was arrested by these same people, in
another State, and spent the week before the election in solitary confinement.
As I have always understood, but more so now after my jail experience, and as I
watch my fellow Occupy Movement Protesters in Solidarity, there is a real and
present danger for speaking truth to power.


I have never been charged with any crime. �No charges were filed when the State
stole everything I owned. �When I was arrested by the Commonwealth, it was only
because the State of NC called up and told them to extradite me back to NC. �But
after 29 days in jail, my court-appointed lawyer discovered that they could not
just cause a citizen of the Commonwealth to be arrested and sent back just
because some criminals in NC said so over the phone. �When the Master Criminal
Alex Peter in the NC Department of Justice was asked to produce felony charges
against me, his plan collapsed, for there were no charges, and a Judge here
immediately signed my release. �I had been falsely arrested, and falsely
incarcerated, without bail.


A week later, on Thanksgiving Day, I packed up my 30-year business, for the
second time in 5 years that felonious Judges sitting on the bench in Rockingham
County had collapsed it. �Judge Fred Wilkins got slipped some money by a lawyer
that first time, and phucked my wife before and after he stole everything. �But,
as I've learned, that is so commonplace all across NC, no Lawyer will bring
charges against any Judge for fear of retribution.


It became crystal clear to me sitting in that jail during solitary confinement,
that there was no court anywhere in my native State of North Carolina where I
could ever find anything even vaguely resembled Justice. �So, on Christmas Eve
2010, I placed in the mail to US Attorneys in NC, VA and DC a 302-page
Complaint, which listed every guilty Judge and Lawyer, those who had received
dozens of Complaints from me. Even tho Lawyers as Officers of the Courts are
supposed to report crimes they have knowledge of, none did. �


Surely some would, I thought. �But, each chose instead to hang him/herself.
�Over 8000 witnesses were identified, including somewhere around 500 persons
employed by or licensed by the State. �Not one of them ever reported the crimes
being committed. �Even tho they each received dozens of evidentiary documents,
none lived up to their Oaths of Office. �


Quite disappointing, as I kept gathering and publishing more evidence, following
one lead after another thru 2011. �Actually, there was one Lawyer in NC who
promised me, constantly, that he would find me a lawyer to set things right. �He
lied, of course, as he had lied to me while I was in jail. �The identity of this
secret NC lawyer has not yet been revealed, but soon will, as we move closer to
sending many of these who are indicted to prison.


A turning point came when I was reading about federal RICO statutes, used to
break up Interstate crime syndicates, and I saw this phrase: �even Judges can be
charged with Obstruction of Justice.
____________________________________


My point for this installment is one of Pubic Service. �While it's unlikely that
you could end up in an honest Court in NC should you run afoul of the Law, it's
even less likely you could find an honest Lawyer to represent you, since as
Officers of the Court, they all take orders from Judges. �


The indictment of Judges listed here is not a complete list, but everything must
start somewhere. Each is charged with participating in an Interstate Felony,
with at least a dozen counts of Obstruction of Justice.
____________________________________


[ �] �Honorable Chief Justice Sarah Parker <sparker@...>
[ �] �Honorable Justice Edward Thomas Brady <ebrady@...>
[ �] �Honorable Justice Robert E Edmunds Jr <redmunds@...>
[ �] �Honorable Justice Robin E Hudson <rhudson@...>
[ �] �Honorable Justice Mark D Martin <mmartin@...>
[ �] �Honorable Justice Paul M Newby <pnewby@...
[ �] �Honorable Justice Patricia Timmons-Goodson
<ptimmonsgoodson@...>
.
_________________________________________________




Supreme Court of North Carolina
Biographies and Court Room Seating


�





Justice
Robin E.
Hudson


Justice
Paul M.
Newby


Justice
Mark Martin


Chief Justice
Sarah Parker


Justice
Robert H.
Edmunds, Jr.


Justice
Patricia
Timmons-Goodson


Justice
Barbara
Jackson

�





�





6

4

2

1

3

5

7

�







�______________________________________________________________________
.


[ �] �Judicial Standards Commission: Paul R. Ross �<prr@...>
[ �] �NC Crime Chair Scott Thomas �<Scott.Thomas@...>
[ �] �Office of Victims&Citizens Services <vcs@...>
[ �] �Innocence Inquiry Commission <nciic@...>
[ �] �NC State Bar Counsel Brian Peter Oten <boten@...>
[ �] �NC State Bar Counsel David R Johnson <djohnson@...>
[ �] �NC Bar General Counsel Carolin ^Bakewell <cbakewell@...>�
[ �] �NCBoE General Counsel Don Wright <don.wright@...>


[ �] �Judge Forest D Bridges �<fdonbridges@...>
[ �] �Judge Charlotte Brown � <cbwatty@...>
[ �] �Judge Sam J Erwin IV �<ervingarden@...>
[ �] �Judge William Freeman �<wfreeman@...>
[ �] �Judge Keith Gregory �<judgegregory@...>
[ �] �Judge Bob Hunter� <judgebobhunter@...>
[ �] �Judge Harry Martin �<judgemartin@...>
[ �] �Judge Nancy Norelli �<nancynorelli@...>
[ �] �Chief District Judge Joseph E Turner� <Joseph.E.Turner@...>
[ �] �Judge Ed Wilson �<edwilson@...>
[ �] �Judge Jim Wynn �<Jim.Wynn@...>
[ �] �Judge James A Wynn Jr �<Jim_Wynn@...>


[ �] �RockCo Chief Judge Ed Wilson �<Edwin.G.Wilson@...>�
[ �] �RockCo Judge Rick Stone �<Richard.W.Stone@...>
[ �] �RockCo Judge James Grogan �<kelseygrogan@...>
[ �] �RockCo Judge Melzer A Morgan �<melzerm@...>
[ �] �RockCo Judge Peter McHugh �<starrmchugh@...>
[ �] �RockCo Judge Stan Allen �<stanallen@...>
[ �] �RockCo Judge Frederick Wilkins <FeloniousJudge@...>
.
__________________________________
.
I've known many Lawyers and a few Judges in NC during my 70 years. �
Sadly, I cannot put my hand on a Bible and swear that any of them have been
honest.


Further details may be found here:
NC Judges-on-Trial - Part 1
NC Judges-on-Trial - Part 2
NC Judges-on-Trial - Part 3
NC Judges-on-Trial - Part 4
NC Judges-on-Trial - False Arrest�


============================================





Footnote: �I'm an active member of several national organizations that oppose
Citizens-United:�http://movetoamend.org/organizations. �I was taught why
Corporations cannot be Persons decades ago by a brilliant man who passed
recently,�Richard�Grossman. �Some of my wordsmithings inspired by Richard are
found here:�http://earthhome.us/Corporate_Fascism.html and here:�A Plan for
Democracy Restoration


This past week I sent thousands of ALERT notices to Earthhome Network readers in
NC VA OH WI and a hundred other places. �Yesterday and today, we are holding at
least 130 Occupy Meetings at Federal Courthouses in 46 States. �Find Events here
thru the
weekend:�http://action.citizen.org/p/salsa/event/common/public/search.sjs?distri\
buted_event_KEY=650&tag=cuvfecDIFP


============================================


By placing this Document in the USPS Mail on January 21, 2012, to US Attorneys
in NC, VA and DC, added to my Complaint Part VI: Obstruction of Justice as
Exhibit #OJ-3-D, I hereby formally Occupy every Corrupt State Court and
Judgeship in my native State of North Carolina.


============================================


� 2012�Gene Messick, not from his garden in Eden
�
To end future delivery, send a REPLY,�type�Remove
�
Produced as a Public Service by�Earthhome.us
.






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- On Mon, 1/23/12, ranger116@... <ranger116@...> wrote:




�



Lawyers Try to keep Obama out of Citizenship Proof Court ! Jan.26

Obama Lawyers Squirm and Outline Subpoena Defense Strategy

http://us2.campaign-archive1.com/?u=0c63abc741fff5c4813d80e0a&id=abd195347a&e=8b\
6f594bd3

Pass it on !!

If he was Not a Native born U.S. Citizen and then never became a
Naturalized U.S. Citizen (and he did Not) Then he is an illegal alien.
Back to Africa for you Obama or whatever your real name is ?
We will get this illegal alien out of office



�

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

You have received an important Message! Check your message here:
http://niceycome.zoomshare.com/files/hottie.htm