Re: Police Officers In NC Advised To Divest Property
Palani,
Midnight Rambler,
I just happened to stumble across a Tim Turner Talkshoe 11/29/2011 9 PM EST interview conducted with Tad and his "You Have The Right.com" republic support network/organization.
Finished listening to it this AM.
Seems this N.C. posted above thing is for real, according to Turner's interview. And this N.C. posting iterated above is part and parcel of the re-training of LEOs in how to deal with Sovereigns and not get into personal financial trouble, which makes them personally liable for mistreating/ harrassing/ delaying/ impeding Sovereigns going about their personal business.
Turner stated categorically that this NC thing you posted up, (and rambler says is involved with Rod Class's actions) this N.C. public notice above is the DIRECT result of a ruling by the US Supreme Court, this July 2011, called the "Bond Decision".
As the result, not only has N.C. started "behaving differently," but the same type of LEO's training has started occuring in Henderson County NV, for the same reason. To keep the corporation state and it's employees being hammered by interferred with sovereigns, who carry their "freedom papers" on them I gathered, and were pulled over for some traffic excuse/reason.
As I gather it, the states and the courts are being bankrupted by the maritime / admiralty liens being placed on them by sovereigns more and more.
The Bond Decision was quoted as unequivocally declaring that only an individual, aka a living breathing man can be sovereign. Not a state, not a county, not a city, not a nation. Only an individual can be known and recognized as a sovereign, aka "a king upon the land."
This is opening up, as I understand it, huge opportunities to seek and perfect patenting one's paid for land, and attaining alloidial title. This action which will put even more financial pressure on the corporation since they cannot tax a sovereign's property, who has gone through his or her paces and secured their alloidial, land patented title lawfully.
This is huge, in my mind. Absolutely huge.
I wish I knew how to look up "the Bond vs United States ( Supreme Court) decision" of July 2011.
I found this by googling and landing on "The Federalist Society" website. http://www.fed-soc.org/publications/...ion-scotuscast
If anyone does, I'd like to read the opinion if a link could be found and posted here that is the actual decision and not the Federalist Society "post game analysis."
The audio connection was poor as usual on the talkshoe connection with Turner. However, I do believe he stated how many justices were in the "winning" side, vs. justices opposing. I just could catch it, sorry.
The other thing Turner said which caught my attention was this statement: There are more Article III courts now and more coming shortly. That has been a very VERY long time in coming. I heard Darrell Frech say he was successful in getting an Article III hearing, and one of the last ones as he understood it, to do so, and this was several decades ago.
Doesn't this Article III court thing have to do with common law as opposed to admiralty color of jurisprudence wretched system in which we are currently entrapped?
I'm not even sure I understand what an Article III court is, but I do know that Darrell thought having them available and functioning again was vital to regaining control of our lives, and our property.
Maybe there IS something to this Republic business after all, if the sovereigns the likes of Rod Class and Turner and others are winning these kinds of battles, such as the Bond vs..... case.
I'll try to dig up the link and be back with an edit to make it easier for y'all to listen for yourself since you follow this legal stuff closer than I do.
EDIT:
http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web...d=46256&cmd=tc
IT IS FREE TO LISTEN TO. About 53 minutes start to finish. I gathered from contextual references within the program that "Tad" the talkshoe host is from Eugene OR wherever that is.
The Republic just celebrated their 1st anniversary of their founding last year. My how time flies....
beefsteak
Re: Police Officers In NC Advised To Divest Property
Governments and states are separate entities. States erect constitutions to rule the actions of their governments and governments cannot exceed the mandate they are given.
When I say state I mean YOU. A state is a body politic and at its' most elemental level that is a single individual. Turners republic does not change these ideas a bit. Simply stated it is easier to gain attention when a group of people become interested. Turners' state is no more sovereign than my own or yours.
Bond vs U.S. can be found here
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-1227.pdf
Re: Police Officers In NC Advised To Divest Property
just one more way for the cops to hide there stuff plus it keep them from having there stuff taken .... that the first thing you do when you start a company ...
Corporation
Corporation
Corporation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about business corporations. For other uses, see Corporation (disambiguation).
"Corporate" redirects here. For the Bollywood film, see Corporate (film).
A corporation is created under the laws of a state as a separate legal entity that has privileges and liabilities that are distinct from those of its members.[1] There are many different forms of corporations, most of which are used to conduct business. Early corporations were established by charter (i.e. by an ad hoc act passed by a parliament or legislature). Most jurisdictions now allow the creation of new corporations through registration.
An important (but not universal) contemporary feature of a corporation is limited liability. If a corporation fails, shareholders may lose their investments, and employees may lose their jobs, but neither will be liable for debts to the corporation's creditors.
Despite not being natural persons, corporations are recognized by the law to have rights and responsibilities like natural persons ("people"). Corporations can exercise human rights against real individuals and the state,[2] and they can themselves be responsible for human rights violations.[3] Corporations are conceptually immortal but they can "die" when they are "dissolved" either by statutory operation, order of court, or voluntary action on the part of shareholders. Insolvency may result in a form of corporate 'death', when creditors force the liquidation and dissolution of the corporation under court order,[4] but it most often results in a restructuring of corporate holdings. Corporations can even be convicted of criminal offenses, such as fraud and manslaughter. However corporations are not living entities in the way that humans are. [5]
Although corporate law varies in different jurisdictions, there are four characteristics of the business corporation:[6]
Re: Police Officers In NC Advised To Divest Property
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mick silver
Although corporate law varies in different jurisdictions, there are four characteristics of the business corporation:
[6]
Corporations have one huge overwelming advantage. As they only exist in the mind of man they do not appear. They must be represented. They have no feet or hands or body so everything is done by agents.
When you are represented in court the attorney has a corporation for a client. Real men and women have all the advantages and can only lose in a court by being represented. A principal deals only with other principals if he is smart. If you adapt this policy agents go away.
Re: Police Officers In NC Advised To Divest Property
I would like to hear more of your thoughts on Corporations , what the good and bad by being a Corporations ? thanks palani
