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

Re: [tips_and_tricks] Re {Frog Farmer}: Frog Farmer Confrontation With Criminal Impersonator!

Expand Messages
  • Frog Farmer
    ... If I stand under an apple tree, how many times will I be hit on the head by a falling apple? More realistically, how many times will the impersonator say,
    Message 1 of 7 , Mar 1, 2005
      On Feb 27, 2005, at 11:21 AM, Geoffrey ''Badger'' Gould wrote:

      > While I love this entire discourse, how quickly would the
      > impersonator(s) present simply stop talking and physically attack?

      If I stand under an apple tree, how many times will I be hit on the
      head by a falling apple?

      More realistically, how many times will the impersonator say, "have a
      nice day!"? That has happened several times, while I've not yet been
      physically attacked by ones in fancy suits and shiny jewelry. What
      advantage does this neighbor of mine see in attacking little old me?
      His problem is, he may not be smart enough to envision the next step,
      or the next or the next, and if he continues his "process" someday he
      might find himself in a traffic court setting with all his other
      buddies waiting to testify in their cases, when the judge may interrupt
      nap time for the sleeping ones, and read aloud a short ten page motion
      for dismissal that merely pointed out certain "laws" all these
      functionaries are presumed to obey (at least when witnessed by the
      "public"). In that way might a whole department, or several, become
      informed that there are still Americans who know what rights are and
      who exercise them as a public service so as to keep the species from
      being extinct.

      > If you defend your life, liberty and/or property, sovereign rights or
      > no, the impersonator(s) will simply work harder to subdue,
      > incapacitate and/or (understandly concerned of your knowledge of their
      > impersonations), simply kill you.

      This has not occurred to me yet. I suppose it could. I'm already on
      borrowed time for many reasons. There's a quote about living on your
      feet instead of dying on your knees. But in MY experience, these
      level goons can be easily manipulated. Problem is, back when "they
      caught me" and I spent years in "court", I was ignorant, they were
      ignorant, and I was trying to meet all these people who supposedly
      ruled over me and everyone else. Did you ever see the whole series
      called "The Prisoner"? Do you know who #1 was? I set out to find out
      in real life. I also know someone who did the same and ended up in
      the hospital over it. I know several of those, but in each case I
      could identify what they did wrong in my opinion. It's not that I am
      right for anyone else, but I take full responsibility for what I do for
      myself.

      You know, I've handled my pet rattlesnake thousands of times, starting
      from the minute we first met on a gravel mountain road. "Ricky" never
      knew SHE was "caught". I got her to come along instead. She crawled
      into a knapsack I offered. She didn't know she was captured until she
      got "home" to my house. And then I only held her using physical force
      two times in her life. All the other times she was resting on me or
      going for a ride on me, or in some way enjoying her own satisfying
      experience. You can see us the first time I picked her up without
      restraint on my web site.

      My point I guess is, almost everyone was betting on how soon I'd be
      bitten. I know people get bitten, but Ricky and I had an
      understanding. I try to come to understandings with people, and I
      understand a lot of these impersonators better than they understand me.
      I have invited some of them to pause and become aware of "my file"
      before they take any action that I might misinterpret as hostile. Most
      rattlesnake bites occur when the snake misinterpets an ignorant action.
      Other people can hike forever and never get bitten. "Your mileage
      may vary."

      > I'm sure all the impersonators at The Station will gladly assist you
      > in "make sure [the impersonator is] properly incarcerated" [bg].

      You are?! Not me! I'd be counting on at least one or two coming forth
      to admit and confess conspiracy with my suspect.

      But can you believe it? In over 25 years of "experiencing freedom"
      I've never yet made it as far as The Station. Not that I particularly
      wanted to go, but back when, I was very open to it. Now I have a
      private number to call the desk leader in the station. I don't need
      911 or the phone book number which might be busy. I don't need to go
      there to have my message known. We save gas and time this way.

      I have another friend like me who has been to the station several times
      and released with no agreement to be prosecuted.

      > Once [you are] locked up by the impersonator(s), they will happily
      > leave you to rot, despite any and all rights, law and evidence to the
      > contrary.

      Where has this occurred without waivers being made by the captive?
      This is not occurring near me. The SHOW must go on! Arraignments
      have to happen within 72 hours on the local playbill!

      > From whom does one seek redress, let alone one's returned liberty,
      > particularly if there is No One In Office with any authority even to
      > have you released?

      If there's no one to have me released, can't you figure out I have no
      obligation not to escape? There's no one with authority to hold me
      unless and until they can prove it to the local militia. We have a
      militia here. Very broad based too. Over 400 in this county alone.
      Includes many former impersonators "turned" to work for the
      constitutions since there's been no announcement there's anything
      superior to them yet. There's no "general" plan for impersonators -
      most only know to do as they are ordered by their paycheck giver.

      > << I can almost guarantee that neither of us will see a magistrate,
      > since I've obtained certified copies of all of the oaths of office on
      > file as of last July, and there are no magistrates among them. >>
      >
      > This is what **I** very much wish to know: where and how to find
      > certified copies of all of the oaths of office on file; if there are
      > none (or Just A Few), how can one prove a negative?

      Someone already addressed this. I said to ask. If you cannot ask, you
      cannot do what I do.

      > That is, "there is no certified oath of office on file for you"...?

      That is not the result, as you would see if you did it. You get a
      certified copy of the documant that rests in the public record used to
      show the qualification for office of the person whose it is. Has
      anyone but you noticed it is faulty? Is anyone better qualifed than
      you to declare it faulty?

      > I cannot think some paper pusher (impersonator or otherwise),
      > providing a certified document that So-And-So has no certified copy of
      > an oaths of office on file.

      Neither can I. But then i never said that, did I? See, I can confuse
      pretty well, huh? I like to make people think rather than write
      encyclopedias on it.

      > (I'm domiciled in California state Republic as well, btw.)

      Then why are you asking me these questions? Just kidding, I
      understand why.

      > Years ago on one those dramatized shows had Robert Stack as narrator.
      > They show "the police" arrive at some suspect's house and they knock
      > to serve "a warrant." There is no answer from within.
      > Robert Stack's voice utters the scripted statement that to this day
      > chills me to the bone: "There was no answer. [The suspect]'s silence
      > was a challenge: 'Come and get me!'..."

      Been there, done that several times to date. Only there was never a
      warrant, only a pretext.

      > The impersonators are shown then bursting into the house....

      Not yet. So far, 9 cars, dog teams, 20 troops and helicopters have
      been called off by the man on the phone who always ended by saying
      "have a nice day". I admit, there were tense moments, but I could not
      give in where rights are involved, whereas the propensity of the
      average neighbor is to surrender even sooner than the point to which I
      go.

      > As you do not answer your door, and rightfully so, when impersonators
      > burst in (and one day they may/will), how do/would you respond?

      12 gauge, .223, 9mm., 22. Large propane cannisters. Nothing high
      tech, and they'd probably kill me if it went that far, but make note
      that you qualified them as impersonators. I would welcome a legitimate
      visitor! I happen to know there have been briefings on me so this will
      probably not occur. I'm on a short list.

      You had best ask yourself, why is it that with you they act
      irrationally, while I give myself points for eliciting additional
      levels of enforcement all the way up to top score for helicopter?
      Can't you help them spend funds any better than a quick surrender
      costs?? Believe me, they appreciate funds expenditure and technology
      utilization! It spices up an otherwise dull week. But now that they
      know my game, they don't play anymore. At least that's how it seems to
      me.

      > The news that night will tell the sheeple of "valiant police officer
      > felled in the line of duty" if you DO defend your property, and
      > without a qualm they will report how "the armed suspect was killed at
      > the scene" (or shot [a few dozen times] and taken into custody as
      > he/you didn't do the right thing and just die).

      My problems would be over. Maybe you are right, but then militia
      members of high status would give differing opinions and might act
      individually to seek justice. Who can say? So far, nothing like this
      has occurred in over 25 years of me defending every right of which I
      become aware. That has to count for something.

      > Though killing or wounding an impersonator, anyone defending their
      > property against such an armed assault suddenly becomes "A Cop
      > Killer,"

      Only in the media. So what? Go see what court citations say about
      the same thing.

      > and all the laws on the books won't be allowed in, "as frivolous," as
      > such laws being allowed into evidence might make "a danger to the
      > community" loose.

      To address the above, we have to assume I lived. And you have to
      assume that somebody qualified can be found to administer the correct
      procedures without waivers being made on my part. This I've got to
      see! Haven't been able to see it in over 25 years! Not ONCE! For
      anyone! Even murderers cooperate in their own prosecution! Every
      case I've SEEN involved waivers of rights! Maybe ignorantly made, but
      visible on the record.

      > You and I think alike, in that I agree with all of your points and
      > such: but what does one do with "false reality?"

      Change the channel, or turn off the TV set.

      > They have the guns

      We all have guns! And we all have opinions.

      > every "police stop" (on private property or no) is a Life Threatening
      > Situation.

      That is true! And that's life too! Life is life-threatening! See
      Ricky again. We understand it mutually! I love Ricky. And Ricky
      loves me too. It's evident in his trust in me when life is
      threatened, as I've protected him and he's protected me.

      > If they follow you to your domicile, and thereby pretend it's "a
      > police chase," what action do you take (as they don't have tractor
      > beams), when they have a tire-strip pulled across the street and
      > disable the tires?

      Twice I was followed home. No tire strips were deployed. They kept
      going, probably after receiving word to back off from the desk at the
      station. I am notoriously known, but there are always "new guys".

      > And once the car is forced to stop, how do you respond to their
      > screams (and I do mean screams) for you to Get Out Of The Car, Lie
      > Down, etc., their being impersonators notwithstanding?

      I'd do it! No matter who the bad guys are, when a gun is aimed at
      you, you do what they say, unless you feel suicidal in that moment.
      You look for the next opportunity for action. I'm speaking here from
      experience where I received a triple skull fracture at the hands of bad
      guys.

      I tried to be a hero with a 10-gauge aimed at my face. They avoided
      noise and used a tire iron. They received "govt" paychecks. But they
      were on a night off, not on duty. It was extracurricular activity for
      them.

      > They are ARMED impersonators, ready and Very Willing to shoot you if
      > they even want to PRETEND you are a threat to them by defending your
      > life, liberty and property.

      So true! And yet .223 are called "Cop Killer Bullets". They go
      right through vests. And what 12-gauge slugs do to a head is not
      pretty.

      And all this over tail lights out! Fitting for the end of liberty, eh?

      > These are aspects in which and answers to which I have always been
      > very interested, and to date have been unable to find. I certainly
      > hope you can shed some light on this!

      Again, see Ricky and I facing adversity on my website, frogfarm.org.
      Identify with our mindsets! Just because something COULD happen
      doesn't mean it will for you. Ricky could always bite me, and I could
      always pull her head off, but in reality we both see advantages to our
      cooperation (she has lived far beyond expectations for her kind). As
      the desk boss on the phone has said, "we just want there to be peace".
      And I agreed and that was the last word in years now.

      They still kill other people, but I'm not there to judge the
      circumstances.
    • Frog Farmer
      ... The codes are not law in California. This was shown in a case involving Church of Scientology members. So I just use the requirement in the
      Message 2 of 7 , Mar 1, 2005
        On Feb 28, 2005, at 11:46 AM, tthor.geo wrote:

        > Theoretically, from the California Government Code, the Oath of
        > Office, together with an Official [performance] Bond of a State-level
        > "official" is required to be filed in the Office of the Secretary of
        > State within 10 days [i think; read the Government Code] after the
        > "official" is elected or appointed to his/her position.

        The codes are not law in California. This was shown in a case
        involving Church of Scientology members. So I just use the requirement
        in the constitution. It would be hypocritical of me to rely on a code
        I myself would not permit to be used against myself. But
        impersonators, to do a good job, should appear to obey them, you are
        right!

        > Oaths of
        > Office for county-level "officials" are required to be filed in the
        > Office of the County Recorder.

        They move them around in the complex of buildings, but they have to be
        somewhere!

        > One proves a negative by Affidavit:
        > "I personally conducted an extensive and diligent search of the
        > records maintained at [Office of the County Recorder] located at
        > [address] on [date] and was unable to locate any Records showing the
        > filing of an Oath of Office for the following presons: [XX,YY,ZZ, etc.]
        > "Assuming the currency and accuracy of the Records maintained at
        > [yada, yada], I reasonably infer that no such documents exist as of
        > the time I make my search.
        > "I declare, on the basis of my reasonable and diligent search, that I
        > have no reason to believe that such documents exist."

        Yeah, if there were anyone who cared to read such a thing, it would be
        a good idea, but in reality, I've found nobody qualifed or interested
        in receiving such an affidavit. The corruption and rot have totalled
        the apples. No use planning on having apple pie anytime soon.
      • paradoxmagnus@earthlink.net
        Regarding your comments on the Code. 1. It is my understanding that the Statutes are Law and when the Code conflict the Statutes always prevail. 2. The Code
        Message 3 of 7 , Mar 1, 2005
          Regarding your comments on the Code.

          1.  It is my understanding that the Statutes are Law and when the Code
          conflict the Statutes always prevail.

          2. The Code is private copyrighted law, implemented through administrative
          process and is binding on all contracting parties.  Each individual public
          employee at any level of government is a contracting party, through
          acceptance, consideration, oath and performance.

          I.E., the Statutes are for the Citizens (the Masters) and the Codes are for
          Government Employees (their Servants)
        • DMiner
          Paradox -- Your first comment is totally accurate. The second point makes a good story but is totally false. The Statutes are current laws enacted through
          Message 4 of 7 , Mar 1, 2005
            Paradox --
             
            Your first comment is totally accurate.  The second point makes a good story but is totally false.
             
            The Statutes are current laws enacted through Acts of Congress and signature by the President.  They become Code only when they are reconciled with existing Code and, where necessary, the existing Code is modified.  In other words, the existing Code is the law where it is in agreement with and not changed by the Statute, and the Statute is the law where there is disagreement with the Code.  During the "update" process, the Code is modified by any changes or new sections of the Statutes. 
             
            Some Sections of the Code are seldom if ever updated.  Specifically, where there are many and frequent changes to the Code, it is not updated.  The changes in Statutes are too frequent to allow for updating the Code.  So you and I and everyone else is subject to the Statute where it is more current than the Code.  Where there is no disagreement with the Statute, the Code is the law.
             
            Many people try to make a big deal of the fact that the Internal Revenue Code (Title 26 of the US Code) is not "positive law."  That is a total non-issue where the IRC does not disagree with the most current Statute for that section.  If there is no difference between the Statute and the Code, you and I and everyone else is subject to the Code AND the Statute (since there is no difference).  And where you want to contest the IRC, you had better be able to show that the most current Statute for that section disagrees with the Code or else you will be held accountable to the Code.  Again, because there is no difference.
             
            The concept of the Code being only a contract with certain parties is Patriot Mythology.  If you try to use that argument in court, you will lose every time.  And your loss will not be because the judiciary is crooked or uninformed.  Your loss will be because you do not understand the Constitutional process of making laws in America.
             
            Yours in freedom,
             
            Dave Miner
             
             
             


            From: paradoxmagnus@... [mailto:paradoxmagnus@...]
            Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:47 PM
            To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] Re: Re {Frog Farmer}: Frog Farmer Confrontation With Criminal Impersonator!

            Regarding your comments on the Code.

            1.  It is my understanding that the Statutes are Law and when the Code
            conflict the Statutes always prevail.

            2. The Code is private copyrighted law, implemented through administrative
            process and is binding on all contracting parties.  Each individual public
            employee at any level of government is a contracting party, through
            acceptance, consideration, oath and performance.

            I.E., the Statutes are for the Citizens (the Masters) and the Codes are for
            Government Employees (their Servants)

             

            ---
            Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
            Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
            Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 11/1/2004

          • Frog Farmer
            ... Exactly. I was speaking about California, specifically. See: http://www.factnet.org/Scientology/miscavige_suit.htm?FACTNet ... We were discussing the oath
            Message 5 of 7 , Mar 2, 2005
              On Mar 1, 2005, at 5:46 PM, <paradoxmagnus@...> wrote:

              > Regarding your comments on the Code.
              >
              > 1.  It is my understanding that the Statutes are Law and when the Code
              > conflict the Statutes always prevail.

              Exactly. I was speaking about California, specifically. See:

              http://www.factnet.org/Scientology/miscavige_suit.htm?FACTNet

              > 2. The Code is private copyrighted law, implemented through
              > administrative
              > process and is binding on all contracting parties.  Each individual
              > public
              > employee at any level of government is a contracting party, through
              > acceptance, consideration, oath and performance.

              We were discussing the oath component, which comes before performance.

              Is it okay with you if your opponent's claims depend upon an oath
              existing which does not in fact exist?

              It is okay with millions upon millions of people.

              You don't feel any pressure to fit in with those millions, do you?

              I don't.
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.