Re: FW: Notice to my Congressman on Health Care
Jim’s remark that “incorporated Wonderland and everyone who is born in Wonderland is a citizen, owes allegiance to and is subject to Wonderland law” smacks of “redemption”.
Here are a few responses to the BS “redemption claims”.
A “belief” that is made APPARENT by the rest of his remarks which refers to “sovereignty” & “contracts”.
"How can it be that anything Wonderland says or writes applies to me? I never signed the constitution, so how does it apply to me? What is the
nexus? I never knowingly agreed to a status of servitude and your 13th amendment specifically prohibits "involuntary servitude".. When I was 14 I used a document called a birth certificate to obtain a drivers license, but had no proof it was issued to me. The name on the certificate was JAMES F. STINER. Beings everyone called me Jim or Jimmy, I used that document so I could drive, but never knowingly surrendered my sovereignty. I deny a birth certificate was ever issued on me and challenge Wonderland agents to prove otherwise.
If I am not obligated to obey my parents once I leave home, how could it be that I would be required to obey Wonderland's rules and regulations, unless I do it freely being fully informed what I am getting and giving up.
If we were reading and evaluating the impact a new contract would have on all Walmart employees, when we saw that it only pertained to Walmart employees, we would know instantly that we are not one and move on. Too bad we don't have the same reaction when we read or hear about a new Wonderland contract.”
I would strongly suggest that he READ the LEGAL DEFINITIONS to those TERMS that he has been ABUSING & that directly relate to things like JURISDICTION, being SUBJECT to the LAWS and/or being LIABLE for TAXES.
JURISDICTION - 1: the power, right, or authority to interpret and apply the law, 2 a : the authority of a sovereign power to govern or legislate b : the power or right to exercise authority : control, 3 : the limits or territory within which authority may be exercised
JURISDICTION. The power and authority constitutionally conferred upon (or constitutionally recognized as existing in) a court or judge to pronounce the sentence of the law, or to award the remedies provided by law, upon a state of facts, proved or admitted, referred to the tribunal for decision, and authorized by law to be the subject of investigation or action by that tribunal, and in favor or against persons (or a res) who present themselves, or who are brought, before the court in some manner sanctioned by law as proper and sufficient. 1 Black, Judgm. § 215. And see Nenno v. Railroad Co., 105 Mo. App. 540, 80 S. W. 24 ; Ingram v. Fuson, 118 Ky. 882, 82 5. W. 606; Tod v. Crisman, 123 Iowa, 693, 99 N. W. 686; Harrigan v. Gilchrist, 121 Wis. 127, 99 N. W. 909 ; Wightman v. Karsner, 20 Ala. 451; Reynolds v. Stockton, 140 U. S. 254, 11 Sup. Ct. 773, 35 L. Ed. 464; Templeton v. Ferguson , 89 Tex.
47, 33 S. W. 329 ; Succession of Weigel, 17 La. Ann. 70.
Jurisdiction is a power constitutionally conferred upon a judge or magistrate to take cognizance of and determine causes according to law, and to carry his sentence into execution. U. S. v. Arredondo, 6 Pet. 691, 8 L. Ed. 547 ; Yates v. Lansing, 9 Johns.(N. Y.) 413, 6 Am. Dec. 290; Johnson v. Jones, 2 Neb. 135.
The authority of a court as distinguished from the other departments; judicial power considered with reference to its scope and extent as respects the questions and persons subject to it; power given by law to hear and decide controversies. Abbott.
Jurisdiction is the power to hear and determine the subject-matter in controversy between parties to the suit; to adjudicate or exercise any judicial power over them. Rhode Island v. Massachusetts , 12 Pet. 657, 717, 9 L. Ed. 1233.
Jurisdiction is the power to hear and determine a cause; the authority by which judicial officers take cognizance of and decide causes. Brownsville v. Basse, 43 Tex. 440. [rest omitted]
BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, 2ND EDITION, page 673
LIABLE. 1. Bound or obliged in law or equity; responsible; chargeable; answerable; compellable to make satisfaction, compensation, or restitution.
2. Exposed or subject to a given contingency, risk, or casualty, which is more or less probable.
—Limited liability. The liability of the members of a joint-stock company may be either unlimited or limited; and, if the latter, then the limitation of liability is either the amount, if any, unpaid on the shares, (in which case the limit is said to be "by shares,") or such an amount as the members guaranty in the event of the company being wound up, (in which case the limit is said to be "by guaranty.") Brown.—Personal liability. The liability of the stockholders in corporations, under certain statutes, by which they may 'be held individually responsible for the debts of the corporation, either to the extent of the par value of their respective holdings of stock, or to twice that amount, or without limit, or otherwise, as the particular statute directs.
BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, 2ND EDITION, page 719
SUBJECT. In logic. That concerning which the affirmation in a proposition is made ; the first word in a proposition.
An individual matter considered as the object of legislation. The constitutions of several of the states require that emery act of the legislature shall relate to but one subject, which shall be expressed in the title of the statute. See Ex parte Thomas, 113 Ala. 1, 21 South. 369 ; In re Mayer, 50 N. Y. 504; State v. County Treasurer , 4 S. C. 528 ; Johnson v. Harrison, 47 Minn. 577, 50 N. W. 923, 28 Am. St. Rep. 382.
In constitutional law. One that owes allegiance to a sovereign and is governed by his laws. The natives of Great Britain are subjects of the British government. Men in free governments are subjects as well as citizens; as citizens they enjoy rights and franchises ; as subjects they are bound to obey the laws. Webster. The term is little used, in this sense, in countries enjoying a republican form of government. See The Pizarro, 2 Wheat. 245, 4 L. Ed. 226 ; U. S. v. Wong Kim Ark , 169 U. S. 649, 18 Sup. Ct. 456, 42 L. Ed. 890.
In Scotch law. The thing which is the object of an agreement.
BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, 2ND EDITION, page 1115
ALLEGIANCE. The tie which binds the citizen to the government, in return for the protection which the government affords him.
2. It is natural, acquired, or local. Natural allegiance is such as is due from all men born within the United States ; acquired allegiance is that which is due by a naturalized citizen. It has never been decided whether a citizen can, by expatriation, divest himself absolutely of that character. 2 Cranch, 64; 1 Peters' C. C. Rep. 159; 7 Wheat. R. 283; 9 Mass. R. 461. Infants cannot assume allegiance, (4 Bin. 49) although they enlist in the army of the United States . 5 Bin. 429.
3. It seems, however, that he cannot renounce his allegiance to the United States without the permission of the government, to be declared by law. But for commercial purposes he may acquire the rights of a citizen of another country, and the place of his domicil determines the character of a party as to trade. 1 Kent, Com. 71; Com. Rep. 677; 2 Kent, Com. 42.
4. Local allegiance is that which is due from an alien, while resident in the United States, for the protection which the government affords him. 1 Bl. Com. 366, 372; Com. Dig. h.t; Dane's Ab. Index, h. t.; 1 East, P.C. 49 to 57.
BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, 2ND EDITION, page 59
And I would ask Jim HOW he SUPPOSEDLY “expects” to “catch” his OPPONENT “cheating” and/or “make them pay” IF he does NOT KNOW the RULES of the GAME?
Patrick in California
"It ain't what ya don't know that hurts ya. What really puts a hurtin' on ya is what ya knows for sure, that just ain't so." -- Uncle Remus
--- In email@example.com , "Jim Stiner" <jim118@...> wrote:
> Patrick says,
> "Too bad that Rose's letter misses the mark. It IGNORES the FACT that the
> 'health care reform bill' is based on the COMMERCE CLAUSE."
> Many people live in two planes of reality.
> How can you teach your children that they are free, and use guns to collect
> taxes? I better way is to use interest on loans to private sector borrows,
> and turn over ownership of the fed to the people's bank so that the interest
> collected would go back into circulation instead of going into the coffers
> of the private bankers. We would ban congress from borrowing money since
> they have proven being a shadow of a doubt they are not creditworthy.
> There are many things going to change by 2012