Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [tips_and_tricks] Re: Jail Mail

Expand Messages
  • cassandra vannostrand
    I liked your email on the jail mail. It appears in California that they are the worst, and they really do tamper with the mail there. In fact, it would have
    Message 1 of 13 , Sep 30, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      I liked your email on the jail mail.
      It appears in California that they are the worst, and they really do tamper with the mail there.
      In fact, it would have appeared that at a number of the jails, and at Folsom in particular that they were telling the prisoners that they could not get newspaper articles bigger than about 3 in. by about 5 inches,   ,,,,,,, which of course was ridiculous,
      so of course knowing that they read everything At comes into the jail, we and his family went ahead and had a notice that ,,,,,,,,,,,, we asked for him to keep a record of all the individuals that got the mail, the mail clerk and anyone that he could see that handled the mail, because we were in the middle of a class action lawsuit that they were not only tampering with the mails, but that they were stopping the freedom of speech of those of us on the outside sending anything at all in the mails,,,,,,, so that we could go ahead and prepare for the lawsuit,
      well, it was not long, and they started to stop the nonsense and let in all of the newspaper clippings without us cutting them out and up in a million pieces which was just totally ridiculous,
      \
      further more, we started writing on the envelopes as to what they were doing so that all could read, and what evil and legally wrongful actions that they the mail staff or the jailers were doing to the prisoners, and hwo that this was wrongful,

      Occupant Family <lookin2c@...> wrote:
      Greetings,
       
      There appears to be at least 2 problems your jail mailings will face!
       
      No. 1 is the "jail policy" on allowing "books and pamphlets" into a jail when
      the mailing did not originate from a reputable book publisher! Too much
      problem with smuggled drugs!
       
      No. 2 is that you have not given the jailor "Notice" and an opportunity to be
      heard as we have been demanding for ourselves for quite some time!
      You can do this with a simple writing or rubber stamp that states:
      Warning: Tampering, theft or interference with U.S. Mail is a Felony
      punishable by fine or imprisonment or both - 18 USC 1702, et seq. 
      I have placed this on jail mail for well over 5 years and stopped all
      interference with everything but obviously contraband items! It seems that
      "jail policy" falls when faced with a Federal Felony charge!
       
      Just a word of information!

      Deo volente,
      Jim
       
      Blessed be the Lord my rock, that teacheth my hands to war,
      and my fingers to fight. Psalms 144:1
       
      On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 12:04:23 -0400 Tally Eddings <tallyeddings@...> writes:
      >
      > Dear Sheriff Lou Blanas,
      >



      Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals

    • Frog Farmer
      ... I cannot find any officers in California. See California Constitution, Art. XX, Section 3. Ask yourself who is doing this to me? If the answer is not
      Message 2 of 13 , Oct 2, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        On Sep 30, 2004, at 9:51 PM, cassandra vannostrand wrote:

        > It appears in California that they are the worst, and they really do
        > tamper with the mail there.

        I cannot find any "officers" in California. See California
        Constitution, Art. XX, Section 3.

        Ask yourself "who is doing this to me?"

        If the answer is not "an officer", but "an impersonator", then why are
        YOU permitting it to happen?

        That's what you must be doing in California, volunteering to be fooled
        by impersonators.

        It's a VERY fashionable pastime!

        Yet sooner or later, the volunteers start complaining about one result
        of volunteering or another.

        Go figure!
      • william moore
        Frog Farmer... Hello again!!! The wording in CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 20: SECTION 3: States that: Members of the Legislature, and all public officers
        Message 3 of 13 , Oct 3, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Frog Farmer...

          Hello again!!!

          The wording in CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 20: SECTION 3:
          States that: "Members of the Legislature, and all public officers and
          employees, executive, legislative, and judicial, except such inferior
          officers and employees as may be by law exempted, shall, before they
          enter upon the duties of their respective offices, take and
          subscribe the following oath or affirmation:"

          However the Imposters, you tell us about, do not take and subscribe that
          oath or affirmation they take and/or subscribe to a different oath or
          affirmation which in fact does make them Imposters:

          In a case such as Al Thompson's case, where Al is being held in the
          Sacramento County Jail, exactly how would one go about convincing an Imposter,
          such as Lou Blanas who is presently doing business as the Sacramento County
          Sheriff, that he and his underlings must immediately release Al Thompson from
          the Sacramento County Jail because neither Lou Blanas nor his underlings
          have the authority to hold anyone prisoner there in the Sacramento
          County Jail?

          Thank you again for your help,

          Bill.

          Below is:

          CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 20:

          SECTION 3. Members of the Legislature, and all public officers and
          employees, executive, legislative, and judicial, except such inferior
          officers and employees as may be by law exempted, shall, before they
          enter upon the duties of their respective offices, take and
          subscribe the following oath or affirmation:

          "I, ______, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support
          and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Consti-
          tution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign
          and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the
          Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the
          State of California; that I take this obligation freely, without

          any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will
          well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about
          to enter.
          "And I do further swear (or affirm) that I do not advocate,
          nor
          am I a member of any party or organization, political or other-
          wise, that now advocates the overthrow of the Government of the
          United States or of the State of California by force or violence

          or other unlawful means; that within the five years immediately
          preceding the taking of this oath (or affirmation) I have not
          been a member of any party or organization, political or other-
          wise, that advocated the overthrow of the Government of the
          United States or of the State of California by force or violence

          or other unlawful means except as follows:
          ________________________________________________________________

          (If no affiliations, write in the words "No Exceptions")
          and that during such time as I hold the office of ______________

          ________________________________ I will not advocate nor become
          (name of office)
          a member of any party or organization, political or otherwise,
          that advocates the overthrow of the Government of the United
          States or of the State of California by force or violence or
          other unlawful means."

          And no other oath, declaration, or test, shall be required as a
          qualification for any public office or employment.
          "Public officer and employee" includes every officer and employee
          of the State, including the University of California, every county,
          city, city and county, district, and authority, including any
          department, division, bureau, board, commission, agency, or
          instrumentality of any of the foregoing.

          --
          ___________________________________________________________
          Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
          http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
        • william moore
          Hello!!! The following letter was mailed via Certified Mail on: September 30, 2004 and according to the United States Post Office it was delivered on: October
          Message 4 of 13 , Oct 3, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            Hello!!!

            The following letter was mailed via Certified Mail on:
            September 30, 2004 and according to the United States
            Post Office it was delivered on: October 02, 2004.

            At present I have no idea if this letter ever reached Al Thompson.

            Track & Confirm

            Current Status

            You entered 7003 1010 0002 8848 4301

            Your item was delivered at 11:25 am on October 02, 2004 in SACRAMENTO, CA 95814.

            How would one go about confirming that this letter actually reached Al Thompson?

            From:
            :William-Joseph :Moore.
            c/o General Post
            Clovis, city
            California, state Republic
            Non-Commercial Situs

            To:
            c/o Lou Blanas, d.b.a. Sacramento County Sheriff
            For: :Walter-Allen :Thompson.
            c/o X 4028467
            c/o 5 West -1-01
            c/o 651 “I” St.
            Sacramento, California [95814]
            c/o Sacramento Sheriff's Department
            c/o 711 “G” Street
            Sacramento, California [95814]

            September 30, 2004

            Dear Al:

            Hopefully you are holding up well under the stress of what has happened to you.

            It is hard to believe that right here in America a guy who calls himself an American, like Lou Blanas, is still keeping you in custody, he has been participating in your being held captive well into the second month now, and regardless of what, the Judge, Frank C. Damrell, Junior said on the record at the Hearing on September 17, 2004, it is my understanding that you still do not have access to a pen and paper, or a law library, or Counsel of your choice or even access to the mail that we send you:

            For the benefit of the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department employee who will probably prevent Al from getting this Letter as well as anyone else reading this document: Al is being held on a bogus Contempt Charge resulting from a bogus Court Order resulting from a bogus Complaint for Permanent Injunction filed by a US Attorney, who files bogus cases on the bogus requests of a bogus US agency who failed to exhaust Administrative Remedy prior to the bogus US agency requesting that the bogus US Attorney file the bogus Complaint for Permanent Injunction: Your continued participation in the false imprisonment of :Walter-Allen :Thompson puts you in violation of Title 18 United States Code Section 3: Accessory after the fact: “Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact: Except as otherwise expre
            ssly provided by any Act of Congress, an accessory after the fact shall be imprisoned not more than one-half the maximum term of imprisonment or (notwithstanding section 3571) fined not more than one-half the maximum fine prescribed for the punishment of the principal, or both; or if the principal is punishable by life imprisonment or death, the accessory shall be imprisoned not more than 15 years: And Title 18 United States Codes Section 4: Misprision of Felony: Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both: All subject to :Walter-Allen :Thompson’s immediate receipt of Judge, Frank C. Damrell, Junior’s, Statement of Claim, in writing, and Judge, Frank C. Damrell, Junior’s Proof of Claim, i
            n writing, to the contrary.

            This serves as Notice to any Government Agent and/or anyone acting as a Government Agent who reads this Document: :Walter-Allen :Thompson and I are both Sovereign Americans: :Walter-Allen :Thompson and I do not grant anyone License to represent either of Us in any way and :Walter-Allen :Thompson and I hereby rescind and revoke any signature and/or other action that might cause anyone to believe otherwise: :Walter-Allen :Thompson and I hereby accept Your Oath of Office as an open Offer forming a firm and binding contract between you and :Walter-Allen :Thompson and/or Me wherein is :Walter-Allen :Thompson’s and/or My obligation to help you to keep all of your many promises as viewed through that worthy document the United States Constitution as it requires at Article the Sixth at Clause the Third thereof: And if you do not have that Oath of Office, :Walter-Allen :Thompson and I hereby give you that Oath of Office, under God so help Us God: All subject to :Walter-Allen :Thompson
            ’s and My immediate receipt of your statement of claim, in writing, and your proof of claim, in writing, to the contrary.

            Al here’s hoping that the time will come soon that the reprobates, who are keeping your mail from getting to you, will have to stop using that the old Nazi excuse, “I’m only doing my job,” something will have to stop it from working for them. That excuse will definitely stop working for them when Jesus is the One asking the questions.

            Al here are some Quotes in regard to excuses that may come in handy for someone who really wants to do what is right.

            George Washington Carver: Quotes: Excuses:
            "Ninety-nine percent of the failures come from people who have the habit of making excuses."

            Benjamin Franklin: Quotes: Excuses:
            “He that is good for making excuses is seldom good for anything else.”

            Alexander Pope: Quotes: Excuses:
            “An excuse is worse than a lie, for an excuse is a lie, guarded.”

            Thomas Fuller: Quotes: Excuses:
            “Bad excuses are worse than none.”

            Unknown Author: Quotes: Excuses:
            “Don't make excuses, make good.”

            Publilius Syrus: Quotes: Excuses:
            “Every vice has its excuse ready.”

            Gabriel Meurier: Quotes: Excuses:
            “He who excuses himself, accuses himself.”

            Henry Ward Beecher: Quotes: Excuses:
            “Hold yourself responsible for a higher standard than anybody else expects of you, never excuse yourself.”

            Yiddish Proverb: Quotes: Excuses:
            “If you don't want to do something, one excuse is as good as another.”

            Francois De La Rochefoucauld: Quotes: Excuses:
            “Nothing is impossible; there are ways that lead to everything, and if we had sufficient will we should always have sufficient means. It is often merely for an excuse that we say things are impossible.”

            Napoleon Hill: Quotes: Excuses:
            “The best job goes to the person who can get it done without passing the buck or coming back with excuses.”

            Thomas Szasz: Quotes: Excuses:
            “Two wrongs don't make a right, but they make a good excuse.”

            H. V. Adolt: Quotes: Excuses:
            “We are all manufacturers. Making good, making trouble, or making excuses.”

            Abraham H. Maslow: Quotes: Excuses:
            “We are not in a position in which we have nothing to work with. We already have capacities, talents, direction, missions, and callings.”

            Rudyard Kipling: Quotes: Excuses:
            “We have forty million reasons for failure, but not a single excuse.”

            Abraham Lincoln Quotes: Not Limited to Excuses:
            “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.”

            Unknown Author: Quotes: Excuses:
            “When it is yourself you are fooling with your excuses you are a hopeless fool indeed, so wake up and smell the coffee, then do something that both you and your family can be proud of you for doing.”

            Al there is really no excuse for preventing you from getting your mail. One fellow told me that the mail he sent you at the address on this letter was returned to him because the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department employee who processed that mail is either so inept or so evil that the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department employee claimed that you are not there in the Jail and returned it to the sender.

            Al we are all hoping to see you soon and its really amazing how much of America had to be lost before what is happening to you could possibly happen.

            Yours truly,




            :William-Joseph :Moore.
            P.S.

            Al, I don’t believe that you are getting the latest news there where you are so here’s some late breaking news from yesterday September 29, 2004:

            At New York's Kennedy airport today, an individual later discovered to be a public school teacher was arrested trying to board a flight while in possession of a ruler, a protractor, a set square, a slide rule, and a calculator.

            At a morning press conference, Attorney General John Ashcroft said he believes the man is a member of the notorious al-gebra movement. He is being charged by the FBI with carrying weapons of math instruction.

            "Al-gebra is a fearsome cult," Ashcroft said.

            "They desire average solutions by means and extremes, and sometimes go off on tangents in a search of absolute value. They use secret code names like 'x' and 'y' and refer to themselves as 'unknowns', but we have determined they belong to a common denominator of the axis of medieval with coordinates in every country. As the Greek philosopher Isosceles used to say, 'There are 3 sides to every triangle'."

            Overheard comment: "If God had wanted us to have better weapons of math instruction, he would have given us more fingers and toes."

            --
            ___________________________________________________________
            Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
            http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
          • harold leist
            The first question I would have is when you sent it did you send it restricted delivery? That way he has to sign for it not the person making the mail run.
            Message 5 of 13 , Oct 3, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              The first question I would have is when you sent it
              did you send it restricted delivery? That way he has
              to sign for it not the person making the mail run.

              The other person who may sign for it is a few who have
              express permission to sign for restricted deliver.
              Not just anyone can do it.

              Harold
              --- william moore <notnow2121@...> wrote:

              >
              > Hello!!!
              >
              > The following letter was mailed via Certified Mail
              > on:
              > September 30, 2004 and according to the United
              > States
              > Post Office it was delivered on: October 02, 2004.
              >
              > At present I have no idea if this letter ever
              > reached Al Thompson.
              >
              > Track & Confirm
              >
              > Current Status
              >
              > You entered 7003 1010 0002 8848 4301
              >
              > Your item was delivered at 11:25 am on October 02,
              > 2004 in SACRAMENTO, CA 95814.
              >
              > How would one go about confirming that this letter
              > actually reached Al Thompson?
              >




              _______________________________
              Do you Yahoo!?
              Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
              http://vote.yahoo.com
            • william moore
              Investigation Requiring Information from Lou Blanas The below was e-mailed on October 4, 2004 to Lou Blanas at: sheriff@sacsheriff.com with a copy e-mailed to
              Message 6 of 13 , Oct 4, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                Investigation Requiring Information from Lou Blanas

                The below was e-mailed on October 4, 2004 to Lou Blanas at: sheriff@...
                with a copy e-mailed to Judge, Frank C. Damrell, Junior, at: mprice@...

                Investigation Requiring Information from Lou Blanas:

                This request is being made as part of an investigation prior to turning the information and this investigation over to the United States Postal Inspection Service:

                It has come to my attention that someone under the direction of Lou Blanas, d.b.a. Sacramento County Sheriff is preventing: :Walter-Allen :Thompson from receiving his mail which appears to be in violation of:

                Title 18 United States Code Section 3: Accessory after the fact: “Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact: Except as otherwise expressly provided by any Act of Congress, an accessory after the fact shall be imprisoned not more than one-half the maximum term of imprisonment or (notwithstanding section 3571) fined not more than one-half the maximum fine prescribed for the punishment of the principal, or both; or if the principal is punishable by life imprisonment or death, the accessory shall be imprisoned not more than 15 years:

                And Title 18 United States Code Section 4: Misprision of Felony: Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both

                And Title 18 United States Code Section 1702. Obstruction of correspondence: Whoever takes any letter, postal card, or package out of any post office or any authorized depository for mail matter, or from any letter or mail carrier, or which has been in any post office or authorized depository, or in the custody of any letter or mail carrier, before it has been delivered to the person to whom it was directed, with design to obstruct the correspondence, or to pry into the business or secrets of another, or opens, secretes, embezzles, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both:

                According to United States Postal Service you are in receipt of the following three items and this investigation will come to a close when I, :William-Joseph :Moore, am in receipt of some assurance that :Walter-Allen :Thompson is in receipt of the following three items:

                :All subject to :Walter-Allen :Thompson’s and My immediate receipt of your statement of claim, in writing, and your proof of claim, in writing, to the contrary.

                Item Number One:

                United States Postal Service Track & Confirm:

                Current Status:

                You entered 7004 1160 0001 4304 1260:
                Your item was delivered at 12:37 pm on September 21, 2004 in SACRAMENTO, CA 95814.

                This item was addressed as shown below:

                From:
                William-Joseph :Moore.
                c/o General Post
                Clovis, city
                California, state Republic
                Non-Commercial Situs

                To:
                c/o Watch Commander
                For: :Walter-Allen :Thompson.
                c/o X 4028467
                c/o 5 West -1-01
                c/o 651 “I” St.
                Sacramento, California [95814]

                Item Number Two:

                United States Postal Service Track & Confirm:

                Current Status:

                You entered 7003 1010 0002 8848 4257
                Your item was delivered at 1:11 pm on September 28, 2004 in SACRAMENTO, CA 95814:

                This item was addressed as shown below:

                From:
                William-Joseph :Moore.
                c/o General Post
                Clovis, city
                California, state Republic
                Non-Commercial Situs

                To:
                c/o Watch Commander
                For: :Walter-Allen :Thompson.
                c/o X 4028467
                c/o 5 West -1-01
                c/o 651 “I” St.
                Sacramento, California [95814]

                Item Number Three:

                United States Postal Service Track & Confirm:

                Current Status:

                You entered 7003 1010 0002 8848 4301:

                Your item was delivered at 11:25 am on October 02, 2004 in SACRAMENTO, CA 95814:

                This item was addressed as shown below:

                From:
                :William-Joseph :Moore.
                c/o General Post
                Clovis, city
                California, state Republic
                Non-Commercial Situs

                To:
                c/o Lou Blanas, d.b.a. Sacramento County Sheriff
                For: :Walter-Allen :Thompson.
                c/o X 4028467
                c/o 5 West -1-01
                c/o 651 “I” St.
                Sacramento, California [95814]
                c/o Sacramento Sheriff's Department
                c/o 711 “G” Street
                Sacramento, California [95814]

                Item Number Three appears as shown below:

                September 30, 2004

                Dear Al:

                Hopefully you are holding up well under the stress of what has happened to you.

                It is hard to believe that right here in America a guy who calls himself an American, like Lou Blanas, is still keeping you in custody, he has been participating in your being held captive well into the second month now, and regardless of what, the Judge, Frank C. Damrell, Junior said on the record at the Hearing on September 17, 2004, it is my understanding that you still do not have access to a pen and paper, or a law library, or Counsel of your choice or even access to the mail that we send you:

                For the benefit of the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department employee who will probably prevent Al from getting this Letter as well as anyone else reading this document: Al is being held on a bogus Contempt Charge resulting from a bogus Court Order resulting from a bogus Complaint for Permanent Injunction filed by a US Attorney, who files bogus cases on the bogus requests of a bogus US agency who failed to exhaust Administrative Remedy prior to the bogus US agency requesting that the bogus US Attorney file the bogus Complaint for Permanent Injunction: Your continued participation in the false imprisonment of :Walter-Allen :Thompson puts you in violation of Title 18 United States Code Section 3: Accessory after the fact: “Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact: Except as otherwise expre
                ssly provided by any Act of Congress, an accessory after the fact shall be imprisoned not more than one-half the maximum term of imprisonment or (notwithstanding section 3571) fined not more than one-half the maximum fine prescribed for the punishment of the principal, or both; or if the principal is punishable by life imprisonment or death, the accessory shall be imprisoned not more than 15 years: And Title 18 United States Codes Section 4: Misprision of Felony: Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both: All subject to :Walter-Allen :Thompson’s immediate receipt of Judge, Frank C. Damrell, Junior’s, Statement of Claim, in writing, and Judge, Frank C. Damrell, Junior’s Proof of Claim, i
                n writing, to the contrary.

                This serves as Notice to any Government Agent and/or anyone acting as a Government Agent who reads this Document: :Walter-Allen :Thompson and I are both Sovereign Americans: :Walter-Allen :Thompson and I do not grant anyone License to represent either of Us in any way and :Walter-Allen :Thompson and I hereby rescind and revoke any signature and/or other action that might cause anyone to believe otherwise: :Walter-Allen :Thompson and I hereby accept Your Oath of Office as an open Offer forming a firm and binding contract between you and :Walter-Allen :Thompson and/or Me wherein is :Walter-Allen :Thompson’s and/or My obligation to help you to keep all of your many promises as viewed through that worthy document the United States Constitution as it requires at Article the Sixth at Clause the Third thereof: And if you do not have that Oath of Office, :Walter-Allen :Thompson and I hereby give you that Oath of Office, under God so help Us God: All subject to :Walter-Allen :Thompson
                ’s and My immediate receipt of your statement of claim, in writing, and your proof of claim, in writing, to the contrary.

                Al here’s hoping that the time will come soon that the reprobates, who are keeping your mail from getting to you, will have to stop using that the old Nazi excuse, “I’m only doing my job,” something will have to stop it from working for them. That excuse will definitely stop working for them when Jesus is the One asking the questions.

                Al here are some Quotes in regard to excuses that may come in handy for someone who really wants to do what is right.

                George Washington Carver: Quotes: Excuses:
                "Ninety-nine percent of the failures come from people who have the habit of making excuses."

                Benjamin Franklin: Quotes: Excuses:
                “He that is good for making excuses is seldom good for anything else.”

                Alexander Pope: Quotes: Excuses:
                “An excuse is worse than a lie, for an excuse is a lie, guarded.”

                Thomas Fuller: Quotes: Excuses:
                “Bad excuses are worse than none.”

                Unknown Author: Quotes: Excuses:
                “Don't make excuses, make good.”

                Publilius Syrus: Quotes: Excuses:
                “Every vice has its excuse ready.”

                Gabriel Meurier: Quotes: Excuses:
                “He who excuses himself, accuses himself.”

                Henry Ward Beecher: Quotes: Excuses:
                “Hold yourself responsible for a higher standard than anybody else expects of you, never excuse yourself.”

                Yiddish Proverb: Quotes: Excuses:
                “If you don't want to do something, one excuse is as good as another.”

                Francois De La Rochefoucauld: Quotes: Excuses:
                “Nothing is impossible; there are ways that lead to everything, and if we had sufficient will we should always have sufficient means. It is often merely for an excuse that we say things are impossible.”

                Napoleon Hill: Quotes: Excuses:
                “The best job goes to the person who can get it done without passing the buck or coming back with excuses.”

                Thomas Szasz: Quotes: Excuses:
                “Two wrongs don't make a right, but they make a good excuse.”

                H. V. Adolt: Quotes: Excuses:
                “We are all manufacturers. Making good, making trouble, or making excuses.”

                Abraham H. Maslow: Quotes: Excuses:
                “We are not in a position in which we have nothing to work with. We already have capacities, talents, direction, missions, and callings.”

                Rudyard Kipling: Quotes: Excuses:
                “We have forty million reasons for failure, but not a single excuse.”

                Abraham Lincoln Quotes: Not Limited to Excuses:
                “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.”

                Unknown Author: Quotes: Excuses:
                “When it is yourself you are fooling with your excuses you are a hopeless fool indeed, so wake up and smell the coffee, then do something that both you and your family can be proud of you for doing.”

                Al there is really no excuse for preventing you from getting your mail. One fellow told me that the mail he sent you at the address on this letter was returned to him because the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department employee who processed that mail is either so inept or so evil that the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department employee claimed that you are not there in the Jail and returned it to the sender.

                Al we are all hoping to see you soon and its really amazing how much of America had to be lost before what is happening to you could possibly happen.

                Yours truly,




                :William-Joseph :Moore.

                P.S.

                Al, I don’t believe that you are getting the latest news there where you are so here’s some late breaking news from yesterday September 29, 2004:

                At New York's Kennedy airport today, an individual later discovered to be a public school teacher was arrested trying to board a flight while in possession of a ruler, a protractor, a set square, a slide rule, and a calculator.

                At a morning press conference, Attorney General John Ashcroft said he believes the man is a member of the notorious al-gebra movement. He is being charged by the FBI with carrying weapons of math instruction.

                "Al-gebra is a fearsome cult," Ashcroft said.

                "They desire average solutions by means and extremes, and sometimes go off on tangents in a search of absolute value. They use secret code names like 'x' and 'y' and refer to themselves as 'unknowns', but we have determined they belong to a common denominator of the axis of medieval with coordinates in every country. As the Greek philosopher Isosceles used to say, 'There are 3 sides to every triangle'."

                Overheard comment: "If God had wanted us to have better weapons of math instruction, he would have given us more fingers and toes."



                --
                ___________________________________________________________
                Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
                http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
              • Occupant Family
                Greetings, Just tell them: If we cannot make a good example of you, we will make you a horrible warning ! Deo volente, Jim Blessed be the Lord my rock,
                Message 7 of 13 , Oct 4, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  Greetings,
                   
                  Just tell them:
                   
                  "If we cannot make a 'good example' of you,
                  we will make you a 'horrible warning'!"

                  Deo volente,
                  Jim
                   
                  Blessed be the Lord my rock, that teacheth my hands to war,
                  and my fingers to fight. Psalms 144:1
                   
                • Frog Farmer
                  ... Yeah, I know - I personally use that information. ... Yeah, I ve said that too. For years. It falls upon deaf ears. ... No problem, Bill. You have to get
                  Message 8 of 13 , Oct 8, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On Oct 3, 2004, at 5:55 PM, william moore wrote:
                    > Frog Farmer...
                    >
                    > Hello again!!!
                    >
                    > The wording in CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 20: SECTION 3:
                    > States that: "Members of the Legislature, and all public officers and
                    > employees, executive, legislative, and judicial, except such inferior
                    > officers and employees as may be by law exempted, shall, before they
                    > enter upon the duties of their respective offices, take and
                    > subscribe the following oath or affirmation:"

                    Yeah, I know - I personally use that information.

                    > However the Imposters, you tell us about, do not take and subscribe
                    > that
                    > oath or affirmation they take and/or subscribe to a different oath or
                    > affirmation which in fact does make them Imposters:

                    Yeah, I've said that too. For years. It falls upon deaf ears.

                    > In a case such as Al Thompson's case, where Al is being held in the
                    > Sacramento County Jail, exactly how would one go about convincing an
                    > Imposter,
                    > such as Lou Blanas who is presently doing business as the Sacramento
                    > County
                    > Sheriff, that he and his underlings must immediately release Al
                    > Thompson from
                    > the Sacramento County Jail because neither Lou Blanas nor his
                    > underlings
                    > have the authority to hold anyone prisoner there in the Sacramento
                    > County Jail?
                    >
                    > Thank you again for your help,

                    No problem, Bill. You have to get people, like Al, to quit accepting
                    the claims of imposters in their life a lot earlier than when they find
                    themselves in a jail cell. Would you like to tell us about all the
                    times Al challenged one of the impostors? Or would the video/audio
                    record show us Al acting and talking to them as though they were not
                    his mere neighbors, on many earlier occasions? I could probably come
                    up with a list of generic occasions where Al granted impostors official
                    status. Why would Al do that? The most common reason is to be polite
                    - people resist challenging impostors so much that I could not get any
                    decent discussion of the process going on any of these mailing lists
                    all year long.

                    Even in your own letter that you posted on the 4th, you say,
                    "regardless of what, the Judge, Frank C. Damrell, Junior said on the
                    record at the Hearing on September 17, 2004". but don't you know he's
                    NOT a judge? You know, but you ignore, because of the Lemming
                    Principle - if enough people will call him "judge", you will too. Why?
                    Without a judge there's no real record, but you talk about the record.

                    So the answer to your question for help is, when people quit accepting
                    a lie (even when they KNOW it's a lie - like you did, and Al did) they
                    will challenge the lies offered to them, and the lies will fall.
                    Someone else on one of these lists asked me, in effect, how to use the
                    information that there are no officers, and I said to come back at me
                    as one and we'd see how I handled it. He never replied again, probably
                    thinking that there had to be a set of words to use, and no other.
                    People must be able to respond to different inputs. There is no
                    one-size fits all sentence that "works". Thought is required. To
                    analyze Al's problem, we'd have to go back over the record and undo all
                    the rights waivers he ever made. Do you have a chronology? Let's
                    start with his incorporation...

                    When Al realizes he's been dealing with impostors, his troubles may
                    begin to end, but nobody can understand it for him - he has to know it
                    himself, and act accordingly. I'll bet he's probably referred to "the
                    judge" as recently as yesterday, without really thinking about the
                    results of his false legal conclusions.

                    > CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 20:
                    >
                    > SECTION 3. Members of the Legislature, and all public officers and
                    > employees, executive, legislative, and judicial, except such inferior
                    > officers and employees as may be by law exempted, shall, before they
                    > enter upon the duties of their respective offices, take and
                    > subscribe the following oath or affirmation:

                    So, no matter what the words of the oath, it has to be taken BEFORE
                    THEY ENTER the office. If they never took it, or took it after someone
                    complained that they hadn't taken it, does this forgive the crime of
                    impersonation of an officer? Did Al ask anyone for the law that
                    exempted them? If not, why not? Please answer all of my questions
                    herein if you really want help.

                    > "I, ______, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support
                    > and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Consti-
                    > tution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign
                    > and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the
                    > Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the
                    > State of California; that I take this obligation freely, without
                    >
                    > any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will
                    > well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about
                    > to enter.

                    So they'd have to READ it, wouldn't they? What do you suppose an
                    impersonator thinks when he reaches Art. XX, section 3?
                    Wouldn't that prove he was in violation of the constitution? When he
                    gets to it and reads it, and realizes he never took it, and he still
                    collects that next paycheck, why do people like Al put up with it and
                    call him by an official title? It's kinda like calling a drink a
                    Bloody Mary when it has no tomato juice or vodka in it. Why? Why do
                    people DO that? How are you going to STOP them from doing it??? Can
                    you even stop yourself? I can stop myself.

                    > And no other oath, declaration, or test, shall be required as a
                    > qualification for any public office or employment.

                    So, it's THIS oath that IS required as a qualification for any public
                    office or employment, so why did Al waive that requirement, long before
                    he found himself in jail?? How do you get people to have the guts to
                    call a spade a spade when that impersonator is in your face making his
                    very first lie or demand? That's where you stop all this. At least,
                    that's where I do it.

                    > "Public officer and employee" includes every officer and employee
                    > of the State, including the University of California, every county,
                    > city, city and county, district, and authority, including any
                    > department, division, bureau, board, commission, agency, or
                    > instrumentality of any of the foregoing.

                    What part of "every" don't people understand??

                    I guess people get the government they deserve.

                    For sure they get whatever they accept without objection, and timely
                    objection of a sovereign, not the belated whining objection of the
                    conquered.

                    We have no legitimate government in California, at any level. Nobody
                    can prove we do. Yet millions act as though we do.

                    Al was one of them. When he changes his mind, maybe by reading the
                    constitution once, and not ignoring REQUIREMENTS, he may have the
                    gumption to object the next time someone tries to fool him into waiving
                    his rights. He must STOP his cooperation with liars.

                    So few are able to do that anymore.

                    Regards,

                    FF
                  • chemelt
                    ... I am that somebody (well at least I am one of those somebodies) who asked you HOW to challenge the pretenders. I never got into a debate with you as I
                    Message 9 of 13 , Oct 12, 2004
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, Frog Farmer <frogfrmr@f...>
                      wrote:


                      > You have to get people, like Al, to quit accepting
                      > the claims of imposters in their life a lot earlier than when they
                      > find themselves in a jail cell.

                      .....

                      > I could not get any decent discussion of the process going on any
                      > of these mailing lists all year long.
                      > Someone else on one of these lists asked me, in effect, how to use
                      > the information that there are no officers, and I said to come back
                      > at me as one and we'd see how I handled it.
                      > He never replied again, probably thinking that there had to be a set
                      > of words to use, and no other.

                      I am that somebody (well at least I am one of those somebodies) who
                      asked you HOW to challenge the pretenders. I never got into a debate
                      with you as I realized that it was futile to argue with you and you
                      will now see why.

                      My situation and that of many others (I suppose) is that I (we)
                      constantly get dragged (kicking and screaming) into "domestic court".

                      My ex has initiated four separate suits against me just this past year
                      alone (when he gets up against the wall he abandons and starts a new
                      action).

                      I have challenge jurisdiction of the court (as stated in their own
                      statutes) and still the pretenders ignore the statutes and do as they
                      please. Anyone brass (stupid) enough to challenge their "authority"
                      will always lose.

                      I could see me now going into the court room and telling the
                      pretenders (judges) that I didn't recognize their "authority" and they
                      would laugh at me and enter a judgement against me, take my son from
                      me, or do whatever they want to do (throw me in jail for "contempt").

                      They care not for the law, and certainly care not for anyone
                      challenging their perceived "authority".

                      If I failed to show up in their "court" they would just enter a
                      default against me and I would lose my son. I am in a no win
                      situation.

                      OK, so now Mr Frog Farmer, tell me how YOU would challenge the
                      pretenders in a similar situation and don't tell me some flipping
                      responce like you would never get married with a marriage license or
                      some such nonsence (as I agree the license creates jurisdiction but
                      the pretenders could care less for such technicalities).

                      Go for it!

                      Carol
                    • william moore
                      Hello!!! Am I correct in what I hear Frog Farmer saying that they are all IMPOSTERS because they failed to take the REQUIRED Oath of Office prior to their
                      Message 10 of 13 , Oct 13, 2004
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hello!!!

                        Am I correct in what I hear Frog Farmer saying that they are all IMPOSTERS because they failed to take the REQUIRED Oath of Office prior to their occupying the office that they now occupy under false pretences?

                        Is it correct that the only real power that the IMPOSTERS have is the power we grant the IMPOSTERS by OUR going along with their machinations, for instance, by pretending that an IMPOSTER judge is REAL judge thereby granting the IMPOSTER judge the same degree of authority of a REAL judge?

                        Is that why they can say things like there is no one in Federal Prison today who is not there by his own permission?

                        Is the answer as simple as saying, “No I do not give you permission to do that,” and then shutting up?

                        How does someone like Al who has given them permission take back the permission that he has given them?

                        The questions for Al Thompson from Frog Farmer went out to Al via snail mail and it may be a while before the answers are available.

                        Thanks again,

                        Bill.


                        ----- Original Message -----
                        From: Frog Farmer <frogfrmr@...>
                        To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] Re: Jail Mail
                        Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 02:12:11 -0700

                        ----- Original Message -----
                        From: Frog Farmer <frogfrmr@...>
                        To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] Re: Jail Mail
                        Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 02:12:11 -0700



                        --
                        ___________________________________________________________
                        Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
                        http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
                      • Frog Farmer
                        ... Yes, but you never answered any questions, or did as you now do - specifying some real situation to which I could respond. Asking HOW to challenge the
                        Message 11 of 13 , Oct 16, 2004
                        • 0 Attachment
                          On Oct 12, 2004, at 2:47 PM, chemelt wrote:

                          > I am that somebody (well at least I am one of those somebodies) who
                          > asked you HOW to challenge the pretenders.

                          Yes, but you never answered any questions, or did as you now do -
                          specifying some real situation to which I could respond. Asking "HOW
                          to challenge the pretenders" is about as general as "HOW to make
                          bread". There are probably a hundred or more ways to do both. A
                          general answer to "HOW" to challenge a pretender might be, "either
                          verbally or in writing".

                          > I never got into a debate
                          > with you as I realized that it was futile to argue with you and you
                          > will now see why.

                          ...See why you realized it, or why it was futile? A debate would
                          require two opposing positions, would it not? I had no idea there was
                          any subject of argument to argue about. What were the two propositions
                          available?

                          > My situation and that of many others (I suppose) is that I (we)
                          > constantly get dragged (kicking and screaming) into "domestic court".

                          I take it you are exaggerating. Do you leave skidmarks? What state
                          are you in? Did you know I was specifically speaking about California?

                          > I have challenge jurisdiction of the court (as stated in their own
                          > statutes) and still the pretenders ignore the statutes and do as they
                          > please.

                          Notice that you are not acting as though you think they are pretenders.
                          Pretenders don't have any statutes.

                          > Anyone brass (stupid) enough to challenge their "authority"
                          > will always lose.

                          If they are pretenders, there is nothing to lose. Pretend is not real.
                          It's only pretend.

                          > I could see me now going into the court room and telling the
                          > pretenders (judges) that I didn't recognize their "authority" and they
                          > would laugh at me and enter a judgement against me, take my son from
                          > me, or do whatever they want to do (throw me in jail for "contempt").

                          Just the way you speak of it reveals your mindset which tells me that
                          to you, they are not pretenders. And you may be right because right
                          now I do not really know where you are or what you are really dealing
                          with. If you say they have "authority" and can enter judgments and
                          take your son or "whatever they want" including throwing you in jail
                          for contempt of pretender, then they very well may have such
                          "authority" over YOU.

                          > They care not for the law, and certainly care not for anyone
                          > challenging their perceived "authority".

                          I don't know what anyone cares about where I live.

                          > If I failed to show up in their "court" they would just enter a
                          > default against me and I would lose my son. I am in a no win
                          > situation.

                          Yes, it sounds like you are in a no win situation. I think a large
                          part of it is in the way you speak of it, but maybe not.

                          > OK, so now Mr Frog Farmer, tell me how YOU would challenge the
                          > pretenders in a similar situation and don't tell me some flipping
                          > responce like you would never get married with a marriage license or
                          > some such nonsence (as I agree the license creates jurisdiction but
                          > the pretenders could care less for such technicalities).
                          >
                          > Go for it!
                          >
                          > Carol
                          >

                          Let's see if I get this straight - you agree that the license creates
                          jurisdiction, so you don't want me to tell you that I would never get
                          married with one (even though that would be my answer) but you want me
                          to imagine and then tell you how I would challenge an impersonator in
                          your situation. I guess I can't do that. When I speak from my
                          experience, it is the experience of a human who has spent his entire
                          life claiming, exercising and defending his rights. My rights are on
                          my mind a lot of the time, so that whenever I'm invited to waive them,
                          I notice it and refrain from complying. I don't "find myself" suddenly
                          married with a license, or driving with a license, or doing anything
                          else with a license. I don't even have a license to do healing, which
                          I do a lot as well. My dogs are unlicensed as well (in fact, that was
                          my very first court case, taking three years from start to appeal, and
                          costing the county over 5,000 FRNs.)

                          I know it must sting having to know that you sold yourself into
                          slavery, but I would not give up hope - there may very well be many
                          ways to extricate yourself. I'm just not the guy to ask about that,
                          since I have no experience breaking free of any master. I've always
                          been free and plan to remain that way.

                          The only hope I can give you would be if you were indeed in California.
                          And if you are, the constitution says for you what it says for
                          everyone else. And if you believe what you read, you can act on it as
                          though you believe it. You do not have to take any polls to determine
                          what a majority are willing to pretend, and I think for you to tell
                          yourself what others are willing to pretend and what they care about
                          may be doing yourself a disservice, because it really doesn't matter
                          how many pretenders there are, pretending does not make anything real.

                          I think a big part of the problem for many people is that they want to
                          fill the vacuum that exists, the absence of real "officers", so they
                          accept the sham substitutes that they are offered, for the lack of
                          anything better. Imagine the fomer Soviet Union, when the government
                          fell into nothingness over the course of a few days. Don't you think
                          there were people way out in the hinterlands who never heard the news,
                          and who still trembled in fear of the coming of the commissar? They
                          had no idea that there was no more commissar to fear. Unscrupulous
                          impersonators might even have taken advantage of the situation, taking
                          for themselves that which the kulaks needed to give to anyone claiming
                          to be commissar, whether the claim was real or not. The same
                          situation exists in California. The news has never been announced that
                          the whole show is a farce for the amusement of the gullible, and after
                          all, it's a dirty job and SOMEBODY has to do it!

                          All these unruly slaves out here need to be managed, and by who better
                          than experienced actors? So we who know about the situation do not go
                          around trying to free the slaves. No, we just spend time making sure
                          our own rights are not infringed. You can lead a horse to water, but
                          you cannot make him drink. If slaves don't want to be free enough to
                          pursue it with daily diligence, then there's nothing any of us other
                          free people can do to help them. I haven't met one slave yet that
                          wants to pay me for my time so I can teach them how to be free. None
                          has even offered to do my farm chores for me, or to even help me do
                          them if I would teach them how to get free and maintain it. And I
                          certainly don't have the time it takes to do so for nothing. Could you
                          get an "A" on an 8th grade English exam? That's a place to start.
                          Being able to diagram sentences is especially valuable for dealing with
                          the output of impersonators and pretenders.

                          When you never replied to me with some words out of your own mind,
                          words that you imagine some pretender might use on you, I had nothing
                          concrete to which to respond. And now you tell me that even if they
                          were not pretenders, you'd still have no leg to stand on, but you still
                          want to know how to challenge a pretender. Like you said, you are in a
                          no-win situation, because rights are not the issue.

                          I use the information that there are no officers. I use it to protect
                          my rights. Where rights are not involved, I have no problem with
                          pretenders. I don't have time to worry about changing the world,
                          because I won't live long enough. But I cannot wait for political
                          solutions either, so when these people come into my life, I CHALLENGE
                          THEM AT THAT VERY FIRST OPPORTUNITY. I do not wait for their game to
                          get tiring before I complain about it. I don't even get into it. So,
                          no licenses, so sorry! No "applications" for privileges. No calling
                          them "your honor" or "officer" or "judge". It's Mister, Miss or
                          Misses. And, for those with NO IMAGINATION AT ALL, here's a way HOW to
                          challenge one:

                          "Hey mister! Do you have any personal knowledge of the California
                          constitution?"

                          (This is where you, Carol, would come up with the answer you need help
                          with....would they answer "yes" or "no"???)

                          If they say "no", then they'd be disqualifying themselves, WOULDN'T
                          THEY??????? HOW WOULD YOU INTERPRET THAT ANSWER, CAROL? How does
                          one take an oath to "uphold" that which he has never even read and
                          therefore cannot understand? And if you show him that he never took
                          the oath, will he then uphold the constitution and admit he's not an
                          officer? I've had them do just that!

                          If they say "yes": "well then, how do you interpret Article XX,
                          section 3? Do you have the exemption it refers to?"

                          (This is where you, Carol, would come up with the answer you need help
                          with....would they answer "yes" or "no"???)

                          Will someone claim that it doesn't apply to them? What do you IMAGINE
                          they would do, Carol? You cannot GUESS because each person will be
                          unique. Most I meet admit that they never took the oath and are
                          therefore not officers with the power to push me around. They don't
                          quit pushing others around, just me and a few of my friends, because we
                          know the law and we cannot pretend well enough to make anything appear
                          real when it's not real. But YOU tell us pretenders can enter
                          judgments in the record, even if the record shows they have no oath of
                          office, isn't that right? I really think you're making all of this up,
                          and are playing pretend with me too!

                          You must not be in California, that must be the answer. Am I right?
                        • Frog Farmer
                          ... I prefer the word the law uses, impersonator , since it is the impersonation of an officer that is unlawful and a crime. But I also use the words
                          Message 12 of 13 , Oct 16, 2004
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On Oct 13, 2004, at 1:29 PM, william moore wrote:

                            > Hello!!!
                            >
                            > Am I correct in what I hear Frog Farmer saying that they are all
                            > IMPOSTERS because they failed to take the REQUIRED Oath of Office

                            I prefer the word the law uses, "impersonator", since it is the
                            "impersonation of an officer" that is unlawful and a crime. But I
                            also use the words "imposters" and "pretenders" in order to clarify the
                            concept of deception.

                            >
                            > Is it correct that the only real power that the IMPOSTERS have is the
                            > power we grant the IMPOSTERS by OUR going along with their
                            > machinations, for instance, by pretending that an IMPOSTER judge is
                            > REAL judge thereby granting the IMPOSTER judge the same degree of
                            > authority of a REAL judge?

                            I would say that anyone who can have you thrown in jail has real power.
                            It may not be lawful power, but it is power just the same. however,
                            power does not always equal authority, or the power of an official
                            office.

                            It's called "arbitration" where people can agree to go without a "real"
                            judge and accept almost anyone as their judge. That's what all those
                            TV court shows do. They get the people to sign all kinds of waivers.
                            In court, they'll make you appear impolite when you don't make the
                            waivers they want you to make. No one likes to be perceived as being
                            impolite, do they? So they make the waivers.

                            > Is that why they can say things like there is no one in Federal Prison
                            > today who is not there by his own permission?
                            >

                            I'm sure a lot of them are, but I was speaking specifically of state
                            and local actors covered by the California Constitution. Fed
                            jurisdiction is already limited territorially so that you can usually
                            avoid it if you don't volunteer into it and don't accept it when
                            offered to you in the 50 states. You cannot be affecting interstate
                            or international commerce.

                            > Is the answer as simple as saying, “No I do not give you permission to
                            > do that,” and then shutting up?

                            It might be in one case or another. I don't think there's any
                            particular magic words to use, as each situation is different. Do you
                            want to let the perpetrator of the impersonation off with a warning, or
                            are you motivated enough to make a citizen's arrest? You have a lot of
                            discretion, because there aren't enough jail cells for all the
                            lawbreakers. Isn't that what the cop tells you when you tell him
                            other people were speeding along with you? "Well, I can only catch 'em
                            one at a time!" When there's too many to deal with, aim for the
                            ringleader.

                            On the other hand, what is your own legal status? Have you just signed
                            or verbally made a bunch of waivers where you actually just gave the
                            permission you're claiming to deny now? I see a lot of that too, where
                            people make a big deal over claiming some right, and then turn right
                            around and waive it. A good example of that would be someone
                            challenging jurisdiction of the court, then agreeing to or asking for a
                            continuance, or demanding a proper arraignment but then before getting
                            it, demanding a jury trial and agreeing to a trial date. I see that
                            all the time here, and it's a shame because they no longer conduct
                            proper arraignments, so I guess all the people jailed in Califiornia
                            have given their implicit consent. I know they had a hard time trying
                            to arraign me with several times taking over nine months each and they
                            never were successful.

                            >
                            > How does someone like Al who has given them permission take back the
                            > permission that he has given them?

                            First he has to identify all the permissions he wants to revoke. Maybe
                            he'd better learn to recognize when he's giving permission first. And
                            then he'll need to understand why he's not giving permission in each
                            instant case, as they occur. For example, it's hard to claim you are
                            not affecting interstate commerce when you have FRNs and credit cards
                            in your pocket. It's hard to deny fed jurisdiction when you've
                            applied for and used a Federal EIN.

                            It's a lot better not to grant jurisdiction in the first place than to
                            try to recover from a number of sequential waivers.
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.