Political Planes

[palani]

As many of you know I avoid politics like I do VD, the plague and herpes so for me it is a good idea to know what the political planes are. Here is a quick overlay of those planes covering the United States.

Since I was born and live in the territory called Louisiana I pay particular attention to this overlay. The boundaries of my territory to my knowledge has never been perambulated but was determined by the watersheds of the west Mississippi River, the watersheds of the Missouri River, the Red and the White rivers. The purpose of the Lewis and Clark expedition was to discover the western boundaries of these watersheds.

Most people don't envision that the territory of Iowa (a political overlay) extended to include all of what is now the territory claimed by Minnesota. The Territory of Wisconsin was in (political) control of this area west of the Mississippi at this time and they created two counties: Du Buque and Des Moines (both are legal fictions ... no people in any of them) Lacking people the Territory of Wisconsin found it necessary to create a body politic for each county. They named these body politics JULIEN for Du Buque county and FLINT HILL for Des Moines county. The borderline of these two counties ( and their townships) was a line westward from the south tip of Arsenal Island (at Rock Island). Des Moines extended south to the State of Missouri (a political overlay) and Du Buque extended north to the border with Canada (another political overlay).

With this background here is a pretty good animation of political overlays. These were all created in the mind by people who THINK. None of them really exist. You can hit pause to examine areas you might be interested in.

http://fast.wistia.net/embed/iframe/ojr891ct9j

They appear to have left out the Conch Republic in Key West though.

[woodman]

The territory called Louisiana is a political construct. Not only do you engage in politics, you are a politician at heart.

[palani]

The territory called Louisiana is a political construct. Not only do you engage in politics, you are a politician at heart.

Properly speaking you are correct. Louisiana territory is the topic of something capable of being exchanged. The manner of exchange was called a treaty of cession but this treaty acts as a conveyance and in English law conditions annexed to conveyances never expire ... EVER!!! A political entity called the United States engaged in a commercial act with a political entity called the Republique de France and promises were made and trusts were formed complete with fiduciaries. Gold was transferred from one to another. For these promises annexed to the conveyance to be enforced a man must declare himself to be born in a watershed that was the subject of the treaty. Such was the nature of my declaration that I was born in Louisiana territory.

[palani]

in English law conditions annexed to conveyances never expire ... EVER!!!

This principle has some distinct advantages. There is nothing anyone or any thing can do to modify these conditions. They are cast in stone forever. For example, the United States of America can choose to throw out the organic constitution and implement some government with a new constitution they choose to call THE 14TH AMENDMENT. This new direction has no effect upon promises made 65 years previously in 1803. How could the signers of the Treaty of Cession envision and write into any treaty, contract or conveyance changes that might occur later. Therefore, Art III of the Treaty of Cession when they talk of 'according to the principles of the federal Constitution' they did not commit to anything close to the principles of a 14th amended federal constitution.

This is the path to return to organic constitutional principles.

[7th trump]

This principle has some distinct advantages. There is nothing anyone or any thing can do to modify these conditions. They are cast in stone forever. For example, the United States of America can choose to throw out the organic constitution and implement some government with a new constitution they choose to call THE 14TH AMENDMENT. This new direction has no effect upon promises made 65 years previously in 1803. How could the signers of the Treaty of Cession envision and write into any treaty, contract or conveyance changes that might occur later. Therefore, Art III of the Treaty of Cession when they talk of 'according to the principles of the federal Constitution' they did not commit to anything close to the principles of a 14th amended federal constitution.

This is the path to return to organic constitutional principles.

Bullshit...the 14th amendment is not a constitution in and of itself.
All the 14th amendment did was make the newly free'd person of color of involuntary servitude a subject of Congress, and some rules were set forth for both the state and US citizen to follow.
Nothing else and nothing more.....when are you going to get it in your head there is no conspiracy.
Why do you believe in conspiracies when none exists?

[palani]

.the 14th amendment is not a constitution in and of itself.
1. Anytime the members of a government choose to remove themselves and get replaced by new members there is a new government. This happens all the time. Sometimes they call them a DEMOCRATIC congress and other times they are called a REPUBLICAN congress. Sometimes there is a mix of philosophies.
2. Anytime a political organization chooses to implement an amendment they have then created a new government incorporating these new principles.

All the 14th amendment did was make the newly free'd person of color of involuntary servitude a subject of Congress, and some rules were set forth for both the state and US citizen to follow. Right. Ignore the little man waving his hands in the corner behind the curtain.

there is no conspiracy.
You are the one proclaiming CONSPIRACY. Using the principles I gave above (they are numbered 1. and 2.) everything is done openly and with proper notice. I have no complaint. I have OBSERVATIONS.

[7th trump]

1. Anytime the members of a government choose to remove themselves and get replaced by new members there is a new government. This happens all the time. Sometimes they call them a DEMOCRATIC congress and other times they are called a REPUBLICAN congress. Sometimes there is a mix of philosophies.
2. Anytime a political organization chooses to implement an amendment they have then created a new government incorporating these new principles.
Right. Ignore the little man waving his hands in the corner behind the curtain.

You are the one proclaiming CONSPIRACY. Using the principles I gave above (they are numbered 1. and 2.) everything is done openly and with proper notice. I have no complaint. I have OBSERVATIONS.

So what you are saying is every time an election year comes up and new people are elected into office.....this is a new and different government and therefore a new Constitution as well?

[palani]

So what you are saying is every time an election year comes up and new people are elected into office.....this is a new and different government and therefore a new Constitution as well?
Isn't this what happens when the DEMOCRATS win? Or when the REPUBLICANS win? Doesn't that type of event set up a new direction for government?

And when things get serious, as in when silver was removed from the currency, every state was said to have had a constitutional amendment within several years. Check out Iowa's amendments around 1971. Bunch of nonsense amendments but these amendments altered the course of government. And now the new government had relieved itself of the gold/silver standard. Government had adjusted itself to a new 'condition'.

[7th trump]

Isn't this what happens when the DEMOCRATS win? Or when the REPUBLICANS win? Doesn't that type of event set up a new direction for government?

And when things get serious, as in when silver was removed from the currency, every state was said to have had a constitutional amendment within several years. Check out Iowa's amendments around 1971. Bunch of nonsense amendments but these amendments altered the course of government. And now the new government had relieved itself of the gold/silver standard. Government had adjusted itself to a new 'condition'.

Changing the tires on my dodge truck doesn't make it a brand spanking new truck...neither does changing the oil.

Just because precious metal has been suspended doesn't change a government into a different government under a new Constitution.

You're damn fool who needs help!

[palani]

Changing the tires on my dodge truck doesn't make it a brand spanking new truck...neither does changing the oil.....
You're damn fool who needs help! Right. I drive a Chevy and I need help?


Just because precious metal has been suspended doesn't change a government into a different government under a new Constitution. You must live under a rock to have learned how to think like one. How's that project to heat your residence with a 9vdc transistor battery going?

[Glass]

actually an interesting observation.

Year X and the swearing in of a President and a gaggle of Representatives of a Republic.
They will be installed for 4 years
Swearing in needs an oath to be made
Oath is usually read by the maker from a piece of paper
Oath comes from a document called a Constitution
That Constitution document usually has a number of statements, directions, instructions, limitations and possibly some other stuff.
It will usually say who it is for. In this case Constitution for the United States.

4 Years later and the swearing in of different/same President and a gaggle of Representatives of a Republic.
They will be installed for 4 years also
Swearing in needs an oath to be made
Oath is usually read by the maker from a piece of paper
Oath comes from a document called a Constitution
That Constitution document usually has a number of statements, directions, instructions, limitations and possibly some other stuff.
In this case the Constitution used is called "The Constitution of the United States"
The wording of this constitution sounds similar but is different in a few places.

If the oath comes from a different constitution it constitutes, brings into being, something different than other oaths from other constitutions. It can be subtle but that is what it does.

Its reasonable that if it was done once it could be done every time. Unless the next group affirms the same constitution as the previous group, you have something different to the previous group.

[palani]

If the oath comes from a different constitution it constitutes, brings into being, something different than other oaths from other constitutions. It can be subtle but that is what it does.

Amendments are a directive from the People to the administration ... as in the captain directing the helmsman "PORT FULL!!!!" ... as a command to start turning the ship OF state.

The 14th amendment was just such a PORT FULL command. The previous command to the helmsman was "HOLD YOUR COURSE." and that infers a clear destination ahead and solid navigation.

PORT FULL without a command to settle on a heading means you are steaming in circles. (as in REVOLUTION).

Entities like DEMOCRATS and REPUBLICANS can get control for a while and affect the heading. What I referred to previously as "a new government" does not mean that the ship of state is different. Merely that the old captain got overruled and a new captain has received the directive to steer a different course.

As to the 14th amendment only being for freed slaves ... I doubt if the ship of state can be split into two so that one part of it steers one heading while the original heading is maintained for the organic ship of state. A ship of state is not like an amoeba that can split at will.

[Glass]

PORT FULL without a command to settle on a heading means you are steaming in circles. (as in REVOLUTION).

George Soro's likes to attack a ships rudder. When everyone is dizzy from the revolutions he sends in a new crew. It could include (but might not) a new Captain. May be he just needs to send in a new First Mate and a couple others. Often someone with auditing skills is in the mix.

[palani]

George Soro's likes to attack a ships rudder. When everyone is dizzy from the revolutions he sends in a new crew. It could include (but might not) a new Captain. May be he just needs to send in a new First Mate and a couple others. Often someone with auditing skills is in the mix.
I am sure he is operating under some New Age concept of government .. probably heavy in mathematics because CHAOS seems to be a part of the plan.

You send a series of Dirac Delta functions to the helmsman and see if he can decipher a clear command in the presence of a high signal to noise ratio. Extraordinarily risky when in the presence of reefs and other singularities.

[7th trump]

Right. I drive a Chevy and I need help?

You must live under a rock to have learned how to think like one. How's that project to heat your residence with a 9vdc transistor battery going?

Why are you dishonest?
Is being dishonest a trait of yours to get the sheep to follow your lack of bend and off the wall reasoning?

I never said I was heating my house with a 9v battery.....so why are you perpetrating that lie?
What I said was 15vdc dc is adequate to heat a room using the induction method as portrayed in the video to heat a solid rod of iron.............one room palani, not the whole house.

[7th trump]

Can you show any proof that a new Constitution replaces the old Constitution when ever theres a change in office.

If you cant then there is no proof of this whacked out demented theory of yours palani

[monty]

Why are you dishonest?
Is being dishonest a trait of yours to get the sheep to follow your lack of bend and off the wall reasoning?

I never said I was heating my house with a 9v battery.....so why are you perpetrating that lie?
What I said was 15vdc dc is adequate to heat a room using the induction method as portrayed in the video to heat a solid rod of iron.............one room palani, not the whole house.


How many any watts? How much current is required @ 15V to beat one room?

[palani]

Why are you dishonest?
Is being dishonest a trait of yours to get the sheep to follow your lack of bend and off the wall reasoning?

I never said I was heating my house with a 9v battery....What I said was 15vdc dc

My mistake. You are heating one room with TWO 9 vol batteries. I am positive this will work in summer but in winter be sure to wear a couple wool sweaters and long johns.

[palani]

Can you show any proof that a new Constitution replaces the old Constitution when ever theres a change in office.
I can show you where Iowa City is the permanent capitol of the 1846 Iowa government and Des Moines is the permanent capitol of the 1857 Iowa government. Banking was outlawed in 1846 but legal in 1857. When they change capitol cities to a different location they are telling you that WHAT IS SIMILAR IS NOT THE SAME!!!

[7th trump]

I can show you where Iowa City is the permanent capitol of the 1846 Iowa government and Des Moines is the permanent capitol of the 1857 Iowa government. Banking was outlawed in 1846 but legal in 1857. When they change capitol cities to a different location they are telling you that WHAT IS SIMILAR IS NOT THE SAME!!!

And what bill was introduced to make banking legal because we both know just because a capital moved locations didn't make banking legal?
A huge relocation would bring out every bought and paid for politician to pass a bill with the verbiage making banking legal snuck into a bill.
There has to be a bill that turned into law....I doubt you'll be honest and procure the bill because that will be self incrimination.
You're by no means smart...but very sneaky.
You are correct...your sneakiness is similar to intelligence in the way you play your game, but not the same.

[palani]

And what bill was introduced to make banking legal because we both know just because a capital moved locations didn't make banking legal?

Your analytic skills really suck as does your reading comprehension. Iowa had an 1846 constitution. Then they had an 1857 constitution, the one presently in use. No bill.....CONSTITUTION CHANGE

[7th trump]

Your analytic skills really suck as does your reading comprehension. Iowa had an 1846 constitution. Then they had an 1857 constitution, the one presently in use. No bill.....CONSTITUTION CHANGE

Here you go moron...this will stop your conspiracy parade.
There were banks before the 1857 Constitution, they weren't outlawed like you beleive, but that wasn't the reason behind the new Constitution which you are pushing.
"Banks of deposits" weren't prohibited, only the "bank of issue" were prohibited. These were prohibited because if it closed the people holding these "private" notes lost out financially.

Do a little research will you...its goes a long way over listening to dumb shit conspirators who make you a complete idiot.
How many times is that now that I have proven your conspiracy tales don't exist?
You aren't honest palani!!!

http://publications.iowa.gov/135/1/history/7-6.html

[palani]

this will stop your conspiracy parade
Anyone who you disagree with is a 'conspiracy' nut? Well, this is YOUR kick so learn to get over it or live with it. Conspiracies are generally secret so who ever said anything concerning a document such as a constitution is secret. I will say though that they are subject to INTERPRETATION and there is no conspiracy involved with interpreting a concept in a different manner.


There were banks before the 1857 Constitution

Here is a direct quote from your document


Both the 1844 and 1846 documents had one feature that is interesting as a historical curiosity. Both of them prohibited banks in Iowa.

Certainly looks like you cherry picked your research.

[7th trump]

Anyone who you disagree with is a 'conspiracy' nut? Well, this is YOUR kick so learn to get over it or live with it. Conspiracies are generally secret so who ever said anything concerning a document such as a constitution is secret. I will say though that they are subject to INTERPRETATION and there is no conspiracy involved with interpreting a concept in a different manner.



Here is a direct quote from your document



Certainly looks like you cherry picked your research.

There was no cherry picking....and even if there was cherry picking it still proves you're wrong.....hence why you are making accusations in defeat.

You stated that all banking was prohibited prior the relocation of the Iowa capital and then credited banking being legal to a new state Constitution when the capital did relocate.
I dont see in the constitution outlawing banking or the reverse. That determination would never be on a constitutional level, but on a statutory level somewhere in the Iowa law books. Which I still beleive is correct.

I came along to prove your theory was wrong...which I did.
Your claim now is a quote from the article saying banking was outlawed...this is obviously a general statement as the article goes into detail stating that "Banks of deposits" werent prohibited while "Banks of issue" were prohibited....it appears it is you who is cherry picking to support your delusion conspiracy.

Heres the definition to delusion.


noun
1.
an act or instance of deluding.
2.
the state of being deluded.
3.
a false belief or opinion:
"delusions of grandeur."
4.
Psychiatry. a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact:
"a paranoid delusion."
I'd say since the article says banks of deposit werent prohibited which you are ignoring to acknowledge and remain on your path that banking was prohibited in general that 3 and 4 applies to you state mental being.

No palani...conspiracies start when there is no evidence of them...hence why they look secretive.
You make outlandish claims that so far you havent been able to prove......thats the start of a conspiracy theory.

[palani]

There was no cherry picking....and even if there was cherry picking it still proves.

Your first statement is nullified by your second.

[7th trump]

Your first statement is nullified by your second.

Cherry picking or not....you're just trying to justifiy your bullshit story that banking was outlawed before the relocation of the capital when clearly not all banking was.
Cherry picking has nothing at all to do with anything except you dodging and making excuses for your dishonest behavior.

Heres an idea for you palani......before going off and making outlandish claims (tales and conspiracies) research the subject yourself to prove what you are doing isnt promoting a lie.

[palani]

prove what you are doing isnt promoting a lie.
Would you then be holding ME to a higher standard than YOU?

[7th trump]

Would you then be holding ME to a higher standard than YOU?

No...it would put you on the same standard.
I dont think anybody can get higher than truth and honesty.

[ximmy]

No...it would put you on the same standard.
I dont think anybody can get higher than truth and honesty.

LOL... Check out 7th trump. Pretending he's on some crusade for truth. The most dishonest GSUS'r out there....

That's the way 7th!

After being caught several times lying, resort to calling others liars to deflect your sin.

http://data1.whicdn.com/images/7755750/original.jpg

[palani]

No...it would put you on the same standard.
Since when to you exhibit even enough curiosity to discover truth?


I dont think anybody can get higher than truth and honesty.
Yet you stick you head in the sand and argue rather than reason.

Here is verbatim the words of the 1846 Iowa Constitution. Good luck finding this document online.


Article IX Incorporations
1. No corporate body shall hereafter be created, renewed or extended, with the privilege of making, issuing, or putting in circulation, any bill, check, ticket, certificate, promissory note, or other paper, or the paper of any bank, to circulate as money. The general assembly of this State shall prohibit by law any person or persons, association, company, or corporation, from exercising the privileges of banking, or creating paper to circulate as money.

[7th trump]

Since when to you exhibit even enough curiosity to discover truth?


Yet you stick you head in the sand and argue rather than reason.

Here is verbatim the words of the 1846 Iowa Constitution. Good luck finding this document online.

Found that document in under the time it takes to type in "1846 Iowa Constitution"....about 5 seconds.
http://publications.iowa.gov/17470/1/1846IA%20const.pdf

And who really cares....article IX of that Constitution agrees with that article I shared saying "Banks of issue" were prohibited.........however, "Banks of deposits" were very much allowed.
I guess you cant comprehend article IX where it says
issuing, or putting in circulation, any bill, check, ticket, certificate, promissory note, or other paper, or the paper of any bank, to circulate as money.
That pretty much describes "banks of issue" now doesn't it?
Hey and guess what Palani?.....that law is still in existence because there are no banks that issue their own private currency.
Do a google search for "Iowa banks of issue"...nothing comes up, but if you do a search for Iowa banks of deposit...there's hundreds of hits.

I only argue when there are discrepancies in someone testimony (tales and conspiracies).....just about everything you say is based on some sort of falsehood.
Like I keep proving...you'd rather believe in a lie than the or a half truth...when the truth is staring you right in the face before you.

[palani]

Found that document in under the time it takes to type in "1846 Iowa Constitution"....about 5 seconds.
http://publications.iowa.gov/17470/1/1846IA%20const.pdf
There is no authority for that document whereas I have in my possession a physical copy entitled Doc No. 16 20th Congress, 2d session Ho. of Reps. I don't know what book you found. It is not apparently AUTHORIZED.


And who really cares....article IX of that Constitution agrees with that article I shared saying "Banks of issue" were prohibited.........however, "Banks of deposits" were very much allowed.
Cherry picking again? It says "The general assembly of this State shall prohibit by law any person or persons, association, company, or corporation, from exercising the privileges of banking,..." as in ALL privileges of banking.

At the time if you deposited specie with a bank when it came time to reclaim it you got the exact same specie back. Money might be fungible but specie is specific. Stands to reason. Specie ... specific. So a bank was merely a warehouse. You would go to court to replevin the exact same item you deposited with them ... as in bailment.

[palani]

http://i.onionstatic.com/avclub/5357/67/16x9/960.jpg

[7th trump]

LOL... Check out 7th trump. Pretending he's on some crusade for truth. The most dishonest GSUS'r out there....

That's the way 7th!

After being caught several times lying, resort to calling others liars to deflect your sin.

http://data1.whicdn.com/images/7755750/original.jpg

You've never shown me where I have lied!
That feeble attempt at trying just proved you're not honest Ximmy. You took my words out of context deliberately and tried to say I said something else.
Good try but please try and show where I actually said one thing and then another on the same topic...then and only then and nothing else.

[ximmy]

You've never shown me where I have lied!
That feeble attempt at trying just proved you're not honest Ximmy. You took my words out of context deliberately and tried to say I said something else.
Good try but please try and show where I actually said one thing and then another on the same topic...then and only then and nothing else.

"If anyone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar" (1 John 4:20)

You say "please" like a gentleman... like one having an appearance of righteousness but you breathe out lies like a dragon breaths fire. You spread false report as easily as butter spreads on bread. Like a snake, you spew venomous lies.
You couldn't speak the truth if you wanted too, because there is no truth in you.

[7th trump]

"If anyone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar" (1 John 4:20)

You say "please" like a gentleman... like one having an appearance of righteousness but you breathe out lies like a dragon breaths fire. You spread false report as easily as butter spreads on bread. Like a snake, you spew venomous lies.
You couldn't speak the truth if you wanted too, because there is no truth in you.
As usual...you take the scripture out of context Ximmy.
I do love my brother....I do not love my enemy.
I bet you didn't know this but "brother" in the Bible. "Brother" is a fellow Christian (man or woman)...I am not to take advantage of fellow Christians. But I am allowed to take advantage of my enemy to a certain degree. And I am allowed send any enemy that wishes to murder me or another Christian to stand in front of God Himself.
Ximmy in order to try and prove me wrong....you have to know that Bible.....not just cut and paste from a search and then act like you know what the heck you are talking about. You don't and its obvious.
I suspect you'll continue your dishonest deeds and try to make God a liar to fulfill your evil agenda.
You don't know a freaken thing about the Bible Ximmy.
You're an atheist trying to use the Bible to make a point.....how rich of you fool!

Go find a bottle and put your drunken head into it

[7th trump]

There is no authority for that document whereas I have in my possession a physical copy entitled Doc No. 16 20th Congress, 2d session Ho. of Reps. I don't know what book you found. It is not apparently AUTHORIZED.


Cherry picking again? It says "The general assembly of this State shall prohibit by law any person or persons, association, company, or corporation, from exercising the privileges of banking,..." as in ALL privileges of banking.

At the time if you deposited specie with a bank when it came time to reclaim it you got the exact same specie back. Money might be fungible but specie is specific. Stands to reason. Specie ... specific. So a bank was merely a warehouse. You would go to court to replevin the exact same item you deposited with them ... as in bailment.

Authority doesn't matter when article IX on both examples are exactly the same verbiage....what kind of fool are you?
Playing semantics must be a past time for you.
Anyway this article says your wrong about banking before 1857.
https://archive.org/details/historyofbanking00presrich
Page 2...second full paragraph state that 330 banks were in Iowa in 1830 to 788 banks at the close 1836.
Hmmmmm....proving you don't do any research.

Anyway, I've noticed you didn't catch what arcticle 9 says.
Care toi take a guess at what I'm getting at?
Has to do with state banks.
Read the 1857 constitution and tell me what you see.

LoL.....what a joke and complete waste of time arguing with a fool like you!
You'll win when you are on the truthful side.

[ximmy]

As usual...you take the scripture out of context Ximmy.
I do love my brother....I do not love my enemy.
I bet you didn't know this but "brother" in the Bible. "Brother" is a fellow Christian (man or woman)...I am not to take advantage of fellow Christians. But I am allowed to take advantage of my enemy to a certain degree. And I am allowed send any enemy that wishes to murder me or another Christian to stand in front of God Himself.
Ximmy in order to try and prove me wrong....you have to know that Bible.....not just cut and paste from a search and then act like you know what the heck you are talking about. You don't and its obvious.
I suspect you'll continue your dishonest deeds and try to make God a liar to fulfill your evil agenda.
You don't know a freaken thing about the Bible Ximmy.
You're an atheist trying to use the Bible to make a point.....how rich of you fool!

Go find a bottle and put your drunken head into it

How mean! {0}

http://i486.photobucket.com/albums/rr222/limboslam/motivator9635980.jpg

[Jewboo]

I don't think anybody can get higher than truth...




https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/5d/eb/3f/5deb3f731847a66b88922b5a108d0e9b.jpg



:rolleyes: 7th Trump now plagiarizing Gandhi...lol.

[palani]

Authority doesn't matter when article IX on both examples are exactly the same verbiage
You are a fool if you don't know that the SOURCE of the authority is what is of importance.

I'll bet you stop at all STOP signs even though no authority is posted!!!!

[7th trump]

You are a fool if you don't know that the SOURCE of the authority is what is of importance.

I'll bet you stop at all STOP signs even though no authority is posted!!!!
Really....so you have an authoritive copy of the Constitution?
Lets test your mental being with some logic shall we palani?

1. The verbiage from your copy that has authority. (copied from your post #30)


Article IX Incorporations
1. No corporate body shall hereafter be created, renewed or extended, with the privilege of making, issuing, or putting in circulation, any bill, check, ticket, certificate, promissory note, or other paper, or the paper of any bank, to circulate as money. The general assembly of this State shall prohibit by law any person or persons, association, company, or corporation, from exercising the privileges of banking, or creating paper to circulate as money.

The exact verbiage from the online iowa.gov website I supplied.


ARTICLE 9·INCORPORATIONS.
No corporate body shall hereafter be created, renewed, or extended, with the privilege of making, issuing, or putting in circulation, any bill, check, ticket, certificate, promissory note, or other paper, or the paper of any bank, to circulate as money. The General Assembly of this State shall prohibit, by law, any person or persons, association, company or corporation, from exercising the privileges of banking, or creating paper to circulate as money.

Now let me get this straight....you're telling this forum that there is a difference between the two article 9 because your copy is or has authority wheres the second iowa.gov version, having the exact wording.................means nothing?
Is that what you are stating?
I don't see any importance of source of authority when they say the exact same thing....verbatim.

Please tell me that's not what you are stating because if it is what you are stating.....you need to seek some serious psychology help.

[palani]

Really....so you have an authoritive copy of the Constitution?

Don't trust things you get off the internet.

[Jewboo]

I do love my brother....I do not love my enemy...I am not to take advantage of fellow Christians. But I am allowed to take advantage of my enemy to a certain degree.




http://www.mandarava.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/famous-quotation-jesus-love-your-enemy.jpg


http://www.museumofconceptualart.com/Jesusisms_vs_Bushisms/images/Love%20Your%20Enemies.jpg

http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6573241_f496.jpg



:rolleyes: 7th Trump misreading Luke and Matthew...lol.

[Glass]

I heard from Winston Shrout that it is possible to take ownership of a "statute" by endorsing it on the reverse. The statute had to be certified by the record keeper and on receipt of it you endorse the reverse making it yours. You can't just print it of the internet and endorse it.

In theory (of Winston logic) if it is a revenue generating statute then endorsing it would entitle you to the revenue generated by the statute.

You will assume at this point that no one else has endorsed the statute.

Couple things come to mind. What are the implications for liability of endorsing something such as this? Do the persons who are in dispute with the statute have a claim against you in your full commercial liability should they have a successful claim?

Does an "assented" statute, such as we have in the commonwealth, qualify as an endorsed statute, being endorsed by the Queen or her delegates?

I mention the assented part because I don't know what happens in the US. Do Governors need to formally assent to a statute before it goes live?

The specifics of assent is something we look at closely here because there are many statutes that are relied upon which are not assented to or incorrectly assented to, making them the same as not assented I suppose.

[ximmy]

http://www.mandarava.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/famous-quotation-jesus-love-your-enemy.jpg


http://www.museumofconceptualart.com/Jesusisms_vs_Bushisms/images/Love%20Your%20Enemies.jpg

http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6573241_f496.jpg



:rolleyes: 7th Trump misreading Luke and Matthew...lol.



LOL.. 7th trump believes I am his enemy... LOL..

http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/60845149.jpg

[Jewboo]

Go find a bottle and put your drunken head into it





https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/503980015101693953/3rqiCLFG_400x400.jpeg




:rolleyes: This the way you spread The Lord's love on the internet 7th?

[palani]

I heard from Winston Shrout that it is possible to take ownership of a "statute" by endorsing it on the reverse. The statute had to be certified by the record keeper and on receipt of it you endorse the reverse making it yours. You can't just print it of the internet and endorse it.
I think the reason judges flip a document over to check the back is to see if it has been 'endorsed'. And it doesn't matter if someone has been there endorsing before you. The last endorser achieves status over the previous ones.

My drivers license (yes ... I have one ... different story) has a place on the back for endorsements. And I have endorsed it.

You cannot endorse things that aren't there .. as in internet.

That is an interesting point though. As I have an 'original' document from the house of representatives ...of the 1846 Iowa Constitution ... what would be the effect of endorsing the back of the document and presenting it in court? Although this would certainly violate my policy of non-political involvement.

[Glass]

That is an interesting point though. As I have an 'original' document from the house of representatives ...of the 1846 Iowa Constitution ... what would be the effect of endorsing the back of the document and presenting it in court? Although this would certainly violate my policy of non-political involvement.

Yes if ever called to a State court over something local your supra authority being the endorser of the Constitution might give you some leverage. It might also give you some liability but I'm sure it's nothing you can't handle.

Question comes to mind, in some state courts here, the Federal court jurisdiction is projected. Does the same thing happen in the US with some state courts? Does the District of Columbia project itself into those courts via some Federal Jurisdiction that is conferred upon them? Would that create a spanner in the works for state authority? I guess you would need to be very mindful of jurisdiction otherwise you might find yourself in the "Land of Oz (DC)" when you thought you were in Iowa.

How can you hold your "contract" when presenting it to a court? Do you offer up a certified copy or do you offer limited review (you keep hold of it at all times)?

Or do you figure that no Judge is going to stick their neck out by endorsing over your endorsement?

[palani]

It might also give you some liability
People avoiding responsibility have more problems. I think it would really throw them off balance if anyone stepped up to assume responsibility.


Question comes to mind, in some state courts here, the Federal court jurisdiction is projected. Does the same thing happen in the US with some state courts?
Most courts present the gold fringed U.S. flag. I was in court once where the U.S. flag was unfringed so I know there is some possibility that the law that is proclaimed is not that of a military occupation government. I have heard of others who have been able to get the court to display one of these naked flags.

[7th trump]

Don't trust things you get off the internet.

Really?
So with that bit of wisdom ....do I or should I trust your exact copy of Article 9?

[ximmy]

You're a bad man 7th trump! Your a very bad man!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jocI_R8lMpM

[monty]

People avoiding responsibility have more problems. I think it would really throw them off balance if anyone stepped up to assume responsibility. Most courts present the gold fringed U.S. flag. I was in court once where the U.S. flag was unfringed so I know there is some possibility that the law that is proclaimed is not that of a military occupation government. I have heard of others who have been able to get the court to display one of these naked flags.


The late Wayne Hage persuaded the late Judge John Davis, Fifth Judicial District, Nye County Nevada to remove the gold fringed military flag from his court room

Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner

[Publico]

That is an interesting point though. As I have an 'original' document from the house of representatives ...of the 1846 Iowa Constitution ... what would be the effect of endorsing the back of the document and presenting it in court? Although this would certainly violate my policy of non-political involvement.

Do you have a certified copy of the 1846 Iowa Constitution? I heard Matt Schultz former Secretary of State say on the radio that it is "lost."

[Glass]

I've been looking into ours. It's plain that in 1973 the Parliament of Australia was created. It selectively endorsed existing Acts from the Commonwealth of Australia. It avoided certain Acts such as the Commonwealth Constitution Act 1901. It gives a different role of the Queen. It makes the Governor General part of the Parliament of Australia so the role is no longer independent or representative of the Crown in ER II. The Judges are all now Federal employees instead of being commissioned. There are many other things such as no title to land. Titles are measured in meters/metres and not miles, meets and bounds. Torrens titles. No rights included.

That is what you call another political plane. The Titles are also another plane. Another drawing on a map with different conditions and interpretations to the old drawings. The old drawings are still there, just like the old parliament building. They just abandoned it. Built a temple to baal and started running things from there. Slightly different name, no one noticed. Told it was modernising the look.

[palani]

So with that bit of wisdom ....do I or should I trust your exact copy of Article 9?
Trust ... but verify. In your mind you have done this by seeking a second source of information. But things that appear on you computer screen are much like everything you see on TV ... subject to being photoshopped.

[palani]

The late Wayne Hage persuaded the late Judge John Davis, Fifth Judicial District, Nye County Nevada to remove the gold fringed military flag from his court room

You actually have much more control over most courts than what you have been led to believe. Anything done there is with your consent. They need your participation to fleece you of time or money. In the end analysis it is because the court views you as fungible.

[palani]

Do you have a certified copy of the 1846 Iowa Constitution?
I have an original document marked House of Representatives. I suppose I could certify it as an original and go from there. I think that would need that I sign the public (front) side of the document as well and then it becomes an original document.

The Davenport library has microfilmed newspapers that cover 1846. I once looked for this constitution in print (public notice you know) and found a discussion of it but they stated the proposed constitution was too long to put into print in their general circulation publication.

Take my certified copy of the drivers license. I made a photocopy of the front and back and then made a statement on the same copy that "this document is in my possession" and signed it in front of a notary under penalty of perjury. Now which document did I certify was in my possession? The DL or the notarized copy? I guess it is a matter of interpretation but it is a certified copy and a notary is a state officer.



I heard Matt Schultz former Secretary of State say on the radio that it is "lost."
I have seen his office. Things could get lost there.

[palani]

That is what you call another political plane. The Titles are also another plane. Another drawing on a map with different conditions and interpretations to the old drawings. The old drawings are still there, just like the old parliament building. They just abandoned it..
'They' can do whatever they will. Just because a new plane is created does not mean that everyone must immediately jump onto it. That logic seems to be a source of many of societies problems.

Take my example of conveyances. There is nothing either the French or the United States can do to alter article III of the Treaty of Cession called the Louisiana Purchase. They can however ignore this article if nobody brings it up. I had the foresight (unconscious mind at work?) to obtain an original government document from 1803 (or thereabouts ... date is not marked) that has this Treaty in both the original French and the interpreted English. I can make it an original by adding my signature to it. I can then certify that I have an original copy of the Treaty of Cession .... and then endorse the back of the certification and I might even add a Fox stamp for the $1 consideration and to ensure that nobody copies my certification. All bases covered. Let's see you do that from things appear on your computer screen.

[Glass]

thats right, but you need to know where you are so that you can plot a course and navigate to where you need to be. For the past couple of years I have been trying to get a bearing on where I am. Actually it seems I had a good bearing early on but there is a lot of differing opinions on what the state of the sea is/was. There are also a lot of opinions about what the course should be. But that would be the course of the fleet. I am not sure I am part of one particular fleet. I might be part of one that hasn't sailed in a while, or I might be the first ship of a new fleet. A fleet of 1. Depends somewhat on the prevailing conditions.

There is nothing to say I can't strike an accord with anyone else I come across. If I so choose.

[palani]

There is nothing to say I can't strike an accord with anyone else I come across. If I so choose.
Best avoid striking an accord with floundering ships that insist upon using fiat debt as money of exchange. They are bankrupt entities and if you get close grappling hooks come out in attempt to use your buoyancy to stay afloat. Best thing to do is stand off a fair amount and place a couple rounds below the waterline to sink these derelicts. They are a hazard to safe navigation. Bring survivors on board under YOUR flag.

[7th trump]

Trust ... but verify. In your mind you have done this by seeking a second source of information. But things that appear on you computer screen are much like everything you see on TV ... subject to being photoshopped.

LoL!
Only a fool would think theres a difference in meaning if a document is certified or not.
You're a fool...and a sore one at that.

Thanks for admitting defeat.

[palani]

Only a fool would think theres a difference in meaning if a document is certified or not.
You're a fool...and a sore one at that..
Apparently my standards are higher than yours. Meaning might be whatever it is but who stands behind that meaning has more value. A fool accepts anything.

[Glass]

Apparently my standards are higher than yours. Meaning might be whatever it is but who stands behind that meaning has more value. A fool accepts anything.

A lot of people accept shiny badges as certification. Some people even accept shiny glass beads in exchange for priceless things, like the land. Who's to say that some people might consider something with official looking stamps all over it as being very important. Especially if they haven't seen something like that before. It might even have signatures on it. Impressive.

If it is their certification then it's binding as to it's value to them. If you endorse it you are likewise valuing it. Claiming it. Probable no one else has previous. Two parties that value the same thing can negotiate over it if they wish. The better you can read a situation the better your position can be. Negotiations might involve underhanded tactics or it might be 100% honorable. That's the risk. But cowards don't like to take risks. So you might have an advantage right there. Honor gives way to right.(leads to) IMO. Your already two up on them.

All you have to do then is hold course.

[Jewboo]

You're a bad man 7th trump! Your a very bad man!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jocI_R8lMpM

http://images.needcoffee.com/dvd/doctor-who-series-1-2005-2.jpg

[Jewboo]

Only a fool would think theres a difference in meaning if a document is certified or not. You're a fool...and a sore one at that.






Meaning might be whatever it is but who stands behind that meaning has more value. A fool accepts anything.





http://i.imgur.com/OVCRBpt.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/px1mVxc.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/WJrGLAe.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/bxY3Ym8.jpg

:rolleyes: Palani and 7th Trump World...lol.

[7th trump]

Apparently my standards are higher than yours. Meaning might be whatever it is but who stands behind that meaning has more value. A fool accepts anything.

What standard are you using?

So tell me Palani...can you identify which is from your certified copy?


Article IX Incorporations
1. No corporate body shall hereafter be created, renewed or extended, with the privilege of making, issuing, or putting in circulation, any bill, check, ticket, certificate, promissory note, or other paper, or the paper of any bank, to circulate as money. The general assembly of this State shall prohibit by law any person or persons, association, company, or corporation, from exercising the privileges of banking, or creating paper to circulate as money.


Article IX Incorporations
1. No corporate body shall hereafter be created, renewed or extended, with the privilege of making, issuing, or putting in circulation, any bill, check, ticket, certificate, promissory note, or other paper, or the paper of any bank, to circulate as money. The general assembly of this State shall prohibit by law any person or persons, association, company, or corporation, from exercising the privileges of banking, or creating paper to circulate as money.

Which one is certified and which one isnt?
And while you are at it....please by all means explain how the two are different in meaning?

Do you think the meaning changes if one is certified and the other is not......or do you think they both say the same thing?

[palani]

What standard are you using?


Of Persons Artificiall, some have their words and actions Owned by those whom they represent. And then the Person is the Actor; and he that owneth his words and actions, is the AUTHOR: In which case the Actor acteth by Authority. For that which in speaking of goods and possessions, is called an Owner, and in latine Dominus, in Greeke Kurios; speaking of Actions, is called Author. And as the Right of possession, is called Dominion; so the Right of doing any Action, is called AUTHORITY. So that by Authority, is alwayes understood a Right of doing any act: and Done By Authority, done by Commission, or Licence from him whose right it is.

Covenants By Authority, Bind The Author
From hence it followeth, that when the Actor maketh a Covenant by Authority, he bindeth thereby the Author, no lesse than if he had made it himselfe; and no lesse subjecteth him to all the consequences of the same. And therfore all that hath been said formerly, (Chap. 14) of the nature of Covenants between man and man in their naturall capacity, is true also when they are made by their Actors, Representers, or Procurators, that have authority from them, so far-forth as is in their Commission, but no farther.

And therefore he that maketh a Covenant with the Actor, or Representer, not knowing the Authority he hath, doth it at his own perill. For no man is obliged by a Covenant, whereof he is not Author; nor consequently by a Covenant made against, or beside the Authority he gave.

[iOWNme]

The only way 'political planes' exist is if the scribbles of 'politicians' somehow alter REALTY.

If you IMAGINE this to be the case, YOU are the victim of mind control.

[palani]

The only way 'political planes' exist is if the scribbles of 'politicians' somehow alter REALTY.

If you IMAGINE this to be the case, YOU are the victim of mind control.

Possibly you are a victim of mind control if you believe the concept of 'plane' does not exist?

The first instance of planes involved the jurisdiction of the state vs federal in Ponzi (yes .. that Ponzi) vs Fessenden at the supreme court level. They opened up the bag as far as I know and let the cat out. Once it is out then this concept may be used to explain quite a few things that happen.

If you are gay (like Hitlery) then you act according to rules in the gay plane.

If you are democrat you act according to rules in the democrat plane .. and likewise for the republican plane.

If you are a true ham radio operator you despise people in the CB plane. Less dedicated ham radio operators tolerate them though.

If you are female (or like Michelle .. pretending to be female) then your dress and demands for Equal Rights are the symbols of YOUR plane.

If you are in an iOWNme or a 7th_trump plane then you despise anyone who happens to think differently.

[7th trump]

Of Persons Artificiall, some have their words and actions Owned by those whom they represent. And then the Person is the Actor; and he that owneth his words and actions, is the AUTHOR: In which case the Actor acteth by Authority. For that which in speaking of goods and possessions, is called an Owner, and in latine Dominus, in Greeke Kurios; speaking of Actions, is called Author. And as the Right of possession, is called Dominion; so the Right of doing any Action, is called AUTHORITY. So that by Authority, is alwayes understood a Right of doing any act: and Done By Authority, done by Commission, or Licence from him whose right it is.

Covenants By Authority, Bind The Author
From hence it followeth, that when the Actor maketh a Covenant by Authority, he bindeth thereby the Author, no lesse than if he had made it himselfe; and no lesse subjecteth him to all the consequences of the same. And therfore all that hath been said formerly, (Chap. 14) of the nature of Covenants between man and man in their naturall capacity, is true also when they are made by their Actors, Representers, or Procurators, that have authority from them, so far-forth as is in their Commission, but no farther.

And therefore he that maketh a Covenant with the Actor, or Representer, not knowing the Authority he hath, doth it at his own perill. For no man is obliged by a Covenant, whereof he is not Author; nor consequently by a Covenant made against, or beside the Authority he gave.


I didnt ask about authority....I asked you what "standard" are you going by.

I really dont know a simpler way of asking.
Maybe you dont understand the difference between "standard" and "authority".

[7th trump]

The only way 'political planes' exist is if the scribbles of 'politicians' somehow alter REALTY.

If you IMAGINE this to be the case, YOU are the victim of mind control.

Political planes is another word for jurisdiction.

Palani is just a victim of his paranoid self.
His beleif in every conspiracy out there is proof of this.

[palani]

I didnt ask about authority....I asked you what "standard" are you going by.

And you cannot figure out what a standard is can you?

[7th trump]

And you cannot figure out what a standard is can you?
I asked you what standard you are going by....not some definition to "authority" by a covenant between two people.
I find it ironic you state "authority'" but yet dont give out any striaght up answers when asked......you weasel around alot....and we all know you do.

[palani]

I asked you what standard you are going by...

And I gave you a standard. What is it you don't understand about it?

[iOWNme]

Possibly you are a victim of mind control if you believe the concept of 'plane' does not exist?

The first instance of planes involved the jurisdiction of the state vs federal in Ponzi (yes .. that Ponzi) vs Fessenden at the supreme court level. They opened up the bag as far as I know and let the cat out. Once it is out then this concept may be used to explain quite a few things that happen.

If you are gay (like Hitlery) then you act according to rules in the gay plane.

If you are democrat you act according to rules in the democrat plane .. and likewise for the republican plane.

If you are a true ham radio operator you despise people in the CB plane. Less dedicated ham radio operators tolerate them though.

If you are female (or like Michelle .. pretending to be female) then your dress and demands for Equal Rights are the symbols of YOUR plane.

If you are in an iOWNme or a 7th_trump plane then you despise anyone who happens to think differently.

Not one example you gave EVER alters reality. In order for you to rebut my position you will have to show me how the scribbles from 'politicians' (sometimes called 'law') somehow alter what already exists in reality. Can you do this for me please?

If a new 'law' says the sky is red, is it?
If a new 'law' says the earth is square, is it?
If a new 'law' says 2+2=5, does it?

No legislation, no rituals, no special ink, no hats or badges, no robes or gavels can EVER alter reality, or morality. Now, i understand that you IMAGINE they do. It has nothing to do with you 'thinking differently', because you dont even agree with yourself. If i scribbled down some 'law' about planes and what you must do, you wouldnt even bother to read them.

What would have to exist between your ears in order for you to IMAGINE one set of scribbles (written by lobotomized monkeys) to be 'law' and the other set of scribbles (written by a crazy individual) to be something you can ignore?

Man either creates 'laws' to match morality; in this case the 'law' is redundant and irrelevant. (like passing a law that says the sky is blue) Or man creates 'laws' that do not match morality; in this case they are to be disobeyed and resisted. (like passing a law that says the sky is red) Either way, 'legislation' can never change anything. EVER.


:)

[palani]

'legislation' can never change anything. EVER.[/SIZE]

The Boy Scouts wrote a manual in part because they don't want to be mistaken for Girl Scouts.