On May 31, 2006, at 3:28 PM, Email41@...
> FF, I'll try to give you this answer. It seems that most are not
> cognizant of all the elements of due process. Because of this
> ignorance and the over emphasis of statutory and case law, most rush
> into these defenses thereby tacitly granting jurisdiction, instead of
> complaining about missing, basic, elemental issues of law. It appears
> that the Hegelian dialectic is at work.
I appreciate the answer. Quasi Compliants are definitely NOT "Masters
of Their Own Domain" in their own minds, but they want to be after the
fact of their submission, and the consequences of it, become
uncomfortable. The question is, how do you get to people so that they
do not submit automatically, possibly even sequentially, and then have
to overcome such errors later when it is ten-fold times harder than to
not have committed the error in the first place?
I remember a morning civics class in freshman year of high school that
made me decide to hold my servants to their contract. Prior to that,
from age six on, I had only decided that they would not abridge my
freedom. Today, I'm waiting for my big chance at the Big Bux at the
Settlement Conference. But the odds are slim since a long time ago I
taught them to leave me as alone as people leave my rattlesnake.
I believe that we can all just get along ala Rodney. Compliants need
masters and masters need subjects and as long as the two can play their
game without me, all can be just fine. It's when they try to draw me
in, wasting my precious time of day, that I bristle and seek to cause a
burning sensation. That was a poison frog analogy.