This update is super long. I strongly recommend skipping RJ's posts.
We have a new contender! Come on down!</Bob Barker>
re: The 14th Amendment (rationalreaper™)
Date: 2011-06-16, 11:45PM EDT
Reply to: see below [Errors when replying to ads?]
WAS ratified and adopted in July of 1868...
Why bother to post lies when they can easily be debunked?
RR™
- Location: rationalreaper™
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2445374042
RationalReaper is an old /pol/ troll who used to post in Boston all the time, and then migrated to Washington D.C.. He/She is a leftist poster - which is a rare gimmick on Craigslist these days. But I enjoy that kind of thing. There's too many Ron Paulites and Tea Party reactionaries,
and they all post alike.
I don't get the trademark though. It's a tad bit pretentious.
RR was just responding to a general RJ post about the 14th not being ratified. RJ fires back:
re: The 14th Amendment (rationalreaper™) (BRING PROOF and ...... (LIES!))
Date: 2011-06-17, 7:24AM EDT
Reply to: comm-cxxec-2445589086@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
If You Bring Proof of the 14th being ratified and I'll show you where you are LIEING and counter with written proof of Your Continues Lies and that you are Communist. We have Nations of Dumbed Down Americans who may fall for your propaganda because they believe whatever they're told. WELL . . . They Are Waking UP!!
Where do you profit from the 14th, poster of "re: The 14th Amendment (rationalreaper™)"
http://www.14th-amendment.com/
http://republicvsdemocracy.org/
- Location: BRING PROOF and ...... (LIES!)
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
Ohhh the game is on! RationalReaper from completely disregarding false evidence provided by RJ and repeating the same point:
re:14th Amendment....Why did you lie? (rationalreaper™)
Date: 2011-06-17, 9:27AM EDT
Reply to: see below [Errors when replying to ads?]
Don't delete my posts.If you don't want to be exposed for posting lies.....simply...Don't post LIES.
It is easily looked up by anyone.An effortless task with the Internet...even for the laziest bastards.
The 14th Amendment was RATIFIED and ADOPTED in July of 1868.
RR™
- Location: rationalreaper™
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2445716664
Looks like RJ doesn't want to argue with him fairly. Nothing new, really, he has always done that to me. In another post:
re Bring proof...re: 14th Amendment...from the Library of Congress (rationalreaper™)
Date: 2011-06-17, 9:36AM EDT
Reply to: see below [Errors when replying to ads?]
14th Amendment to the Constitution Was Ratified
July 28, 1868
On July 28, 1868, the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified. The amendment grants citizenship to "all persons born or naturalized in the United States" which included former slaves who had just been freed after the Civil War. The amendment had been rejected by most Southern states but was ratified by the required three-fourths of the states. Known as the "Reconstruction Amendment," it forbids any state to deny any person "life, liberty or property, without due process of law" or to "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
page 1 of 3
There are a slew of legitimate websites that also verify...but I think the Library of Congress should suffice.
RR™
- Location: rationalreaper™
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2445730966
Woah, woah, woah... who said you could introduce facts into this discussion?
RJ counters below.
2re: The 14th Amendment (NOT RATIFIED)(rationalreaper™) (Huh, That's Funny!! Others DELETE Ur POS)
Date: 2011-06-18, 10:38AM EDT
Reply to: see below [Errors when replying to ads?]
If You Bring Proof of the 14th being ratified (not), I'll show you where you are LIEING and I'll Counter with written proof of Your Continues Lies and that you are COMMUNIST and that you PROFIT off the illgetinate private law system. We have Nations of Dumbed Down Americans who may fall for your propaganda because they believe whatever they're told. WELL . . . They Are Waking UP!!
By you Just Saying that the 14th Amendment was Raitified (not) and throwing out a Date DOES NOT Make the 14th Amendment Ratified.
Where within this unlawful, illgetimate private law system do you profit from the 14th, (poster of "re: The 14th Amendment (rationalreaper™)") The 14th is a Fraud on the American People to enslave and control people of the Republic (taxes, licences, permits, fines, fees, ect.)(Control)
"Senator Doolittle from Wisconsin quoting all the daily statements from the Senate said to wit: "What is said every day; the people of the South have rejected the constitutional amendment, and therefore we will march upon them and force them to adopt it at the point of the bayonet, and establish military power over them until they do adopt it" (See The Congressional Globe Feb 20th 1867 page 1644) This was not just talk for history bears out that they did what they said they would do" The Reconstruction Acts should be evidence enough.
"Like the Utah State Supreme Court in 1968 stated in the case called Dyett v Turner "We feel like slaves in a galley" Now, is that any way for a Court to feel? Is that any way for a Nation to operate?
It will also be remembered that Article V required the willful votes of the State Legislatures, and forbids the deprivation of State suffrage unless such States consent. Guns pointed at their heads can not be considered consent. Not to mention the surrogate government sent in with military support to take out of office the properly elected office holders. There can be no proper replacement of an office holder unless the one moved out is "properly" taken out (see Hoke v. Henderson , Brown et el. v. Board of Levee Commissioner, and White v. White 5 Barb NY 474 1849)
First and absolute foremost, the attacks and evasion on the Southern States were done without "Due Process of Law, so this whole problem is a judicial question since due process is a strict virtue of the Courts.
Did the government provide Due Process when taking life liberty and property from the States and it's peoples in 1861 and thereafter?
It will be remembered that Jeremiah Black, the Attorney General prior to the time that options were being searched out, plainly stated that it would be illegal to invade the States unless they went through the Courts. He further elaborated that if the States were to be treated like enemies then they could retaliate in what ever form they felt necessary, and that ". . . if Congress shall break up the present Union, by unconstitutionally putting strife and enmity and armed hostility between different sections of the country, instead of the domestic tranquility which the Constitution was meant to insure, will not all the States be absolved from their federal obligations?. . . then the Union must utterly perish at the moment when Congress shall arm one part of the people against another for any purpose beyond that of merely protecting the general government in the exercise of its proper constitutional functions." (See Official Opinions of Attorneys General of the United States Vol. 9 page 516 through 526.) What Jeremiah Black said would be the official opinion of the United States Government according to section 25 of the 1789 Judiciary Act. What branch of government took heed or even gave it any rank at all. While this is strictly a due process question yet the Court has hid behind a fraudulent wall called "It's a political Question" Where in the history of Due Process can it ever be called a political question when due process is strictly a judicial function?
Any new meaning of Due Process later than the founded definition at the time it was placed in the United States Constitution in 1790 will have to go through Article V to be constitutionally accepted. So, Post war changes have no standings such as the arrogance of Hurtado v. Calf. 110 U.S. 516 (1884) stating that a grand jury would not be necessary "so long as the rest of the trial is fair". However, even when the Courts has alluded the question concerning the 14th Amendment by using this wall, and saying it can not rule on the issue, I find it contradictory that the Court has made rulings concerning the validity of an amendment five times.(See Hollingsworth v. Virginia, 3 Dall., 378 1798, ; Hawke v. Smith, 253 U.S. 231 1920; Rhode Island v. Palmer, 253 U.S.; Dillion v. Gloss, 256 U.S. 368, and United States v. Sprague, 282 U.S. 716 1931) Such actions taken by the Court negates any trust in them when they turn around and select a time and an amendment that it wants to claim it has no authority to rule on.
The damages caused by the fraudulent teachings in the public schools has severed away the common knowledge from the people in such abundance for so long that one would have to leave his own generational time table and study past the public memory The modern plenitude that over whams the commuting elements in the people has dismantled necessary public reasoning to such a point that their votes have nothing but numerical value. At these so called elections there is no sound minds to consult with as to what policies would be preferred from these people since the policies are already been pre-stored in them by the educating institutions. Furthermore the people seem to be classed as ens legis rather than natural persons.
A final note concerning the Law of Nations. In Article 1 section 8 clause 10 it states to wit: To define and punish. . . offenses against the Law of Nations. It will be remembered that this "Law of Nations named out here spoke only of the one written by Emmerich de Vattel written in 1758 and was thereby fully incorporated in our Constitution word for word as stated by John Jay to all the Grand Juries he instructed around the Circuits. This seems to be totally ignored insomuch that The Law of Nations has not been practiced as it should. Again, any law contrary to the Law of Nations is Contrary to the Constitution and against the Several States. New International law that was supposingly accepted, but in direct contradiction to Vattels Law of Nations has no binding force because no office holder of any level is authorized to pass legislation (Legislation, not the same as The Law of the Land, see Westervelt v. Gregg 12 NY 209) against the Constitution rather international or domestic. I remind you again that changing the Constitution can only be done through the proper use of Article V, which there has never been an Amendment to nullify Article 1 Section 8 concerning this great part of our laws (See, United States v. Smith 5 Wheat. 153, 160, 162 (1820) ; The Marianna Flora, 11 Wheat 1, 40-41 (1826); and United States v. Brig. Malek Abhel, 2 How. 210, 232, (1844), yet the present government violates every portion of it. The importance of this may be recognized by your office or it may not, but I thought it should be brought up even though I will not at this time be elaborating about the connection of this to the other problems mentioned above.
If States Rights are destroyed then so is the government (See Kidd v. Pearson, 247 US 75-276)
Since the 14th Amendment did not ratify, then first and foremost there is no such thing as a United Sates Citizen as defined in post Civil war doctrines ( See Ex Parte Knowles, 5 Cal. 300, 302 1855).
http://www.14th-amendment.com/
http://republicvsdemocracy.org/
- Location: Huh, That's Funny!! Others DELETE Ur POS
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2447871245
It's obvious from the first paragraph that RJ believes that he could never be wrong, and to prove it, he regurgitates his old copy n' paste material. Distraught, he posts again 6 minutes later hoping for an immediate response. Why he didn't bother making one concise, fully fleshed, argumentative post is anyone's guess.
Article V of the Constitution proves that the State powers are supreme over the Federal powers.
State Citizenship has been the proper (and may I add, "only") status that our forefathers possessed before the Military Enforcement of the 14th Amendment upon our Country. (Note: MILITARY ENFORCEMENT")
The 14th Amendment "never" ratified through Article V which has very limited methods and procedures and may I add, "simple" instructions as to when an amendment can be lawfully added to the Constitution? Be assured that neither you, nor any jurist of any level will find the use of "Military Power " to be used anywhere in Article V.
It will also be remembered that Article V required the "Willful Votes" of the State Legislatures, and forbids the deprivation of State suffrage unless such States consent.
Guns pointed at their heads can not be considered consent, therefore the 14th Amendment Does Not Exist!
Placing the American People under slavery by gathering their signatures for their willful consent without full disclosure to slavery under False PRETENCES is FRAUDUALANT, UNLAWFUL and therefore ILLIGITEMATE!! (As Many Court Rulings Have Stated)
The People May Have Been Dumb Down Through "STATE' Run Public Education, but they are now becoming well aware of the power that their signature and their enslavement by government..
For Your Further Education and Action . . . .
http://www.dueprocessdenied.com/
Welcome to the home page link for the U.S. Constitution, 14th Amendment The Amendment That Never Existed. Understand Your HISTORY and Begin Acting!
http://www.14th-amendment.com/
http://republicvsdemocracy.org/
- Location: AGENT, DUMB ASS!!
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
RJ is wrong about
Article V of the US Constitution.
- Article V says nothing about state powers having supremacy over federal powers.
- Article V is not limited in it's power, nor does it limit Congress' power.
- Confederate states weren't states during reconstruction, per se. Don't like it? Then don't secede. (If you can't do the time, then don't do the crime).
- "...and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate." House and senate had quorum for Reconstruction Acts and 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments.
Hypothetically, it does outline an avenue of ratification that could provide checks and balances on Congress by going around them with State Conventions and, but that's it. Whether or not RJ wants to believe it, from the inception of the United States, all states are beholden to the federal government in order 'to form a more perfect union.' It was designed to be like this.
30 minutes later...
re3 Bring proof...re: 14th Amendment(NOT RATIFED) (THE PROCLAMATION )
Date: 2011-06-18, 11:14AM EDT
Reply to: see below [Errors when replying to ads?]
THE PROCLAMATION
Under the sovereign powers reserved to the people under Article X of the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776; we the people, in our sovereign capacity, hereby declares that with the vote of rejection being cast by the Legislature for the State of Maryland on March 23rd 1867, the 14th Amendment to the Constitution was rejected by more than one fourth (1/4) of the lawful Legislatures of the States that were in the Union during the year 1867. The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not exist and all Laws and Judicial Opinions to the contrary are declared null and void ab initio. Anyone who has knowledge to the contrary, come forward and present your evidence.
Gordon Warren Epperly
- Location: THE PROCLAMATION
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2447942696
The Ratification process doesn't work like Gordon thinks it does.
- Failures of ratification do not shut down the ratification of an amendment.
- Rescissions don't matter
- The 14th Amendment did not have a time limit. It really was only a matter of time until 3/4th of the states ratify it. Currently, all states have ratified the Reconstruction Amendments, so the 14th Amendment exists.
An hour and change later...
2 re:14th Amendment (NOT)....Why did you lie? (rationalreaper™) (JACK ASS!)
Date: 2011-06-18, 12:16PM EDT
Reply to: comm-wpuu7-2448077211@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
Yes I agree People Should Google Search. " NON RATIFICATION Of The 14th Amendment " or " The 14th Amendment did not Ratify " or " 14th amendment does not exist " or " the 14th Amendment Enslaves "
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
re:14th Amendment....Why did you lie? (rationalreaper™)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 2011-06-17, 9:27AM EDT
Reply to: see below [Errors when replying to ads?]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't delete my posts.If you don't want to be exposed for posting lies.....simply...Don't post LIES.
It is easily looked up by anyone.An effortless task with the Internet...even for the laziest bastards.
The 14th Amendment was RATIFIED and ADOPTED in July of 1868.
RR
Location: JACK ASS
it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2448077211
Yes RJ, why don't we all do your research for you? Lazy bum.
Straight from the official copy of the US Constitution,14th Amendement (rationalreaper™)
Date: 2011-06-18, 4:14PM EDT
Reply to: see below [Errors when replying to ads?]
This copy is carried in the breast pockets or pocketbooks of most congressional reps...or so they claim.
The GENUINE ARTICLE........Now why would the 14th Amendment be printed in every publishing of the United States Constitution if it doesn't exist?
Do you really think people are going to take the claims of a few racial,radical right wing evangelical websites saying the 14th Amendment was never ratified?
Now I realize that you hate the idea of non-whites having the same privileges as whites.....but no matter how hard you try to re-write history.....it aint happening.
Read it and accept the things you cannot change.
RR™
AMENDMENT XIV
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.
Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Section 2.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,* and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
Section 3.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Section 4.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
Section 5.
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article
- Location: rationalreaper™
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2448584584
Ice Burn!!!
RationalReaper doesn't need any help, but I decided to tip him off [publicly] just to make sure he's on the right page.
What's the deal with that 14th Amendment conspiracy nut? (Hey RationalReaper)
Date: 2011-06-18, 5:00PM EDT
Reply to:
your anonymous craigslist address will appear here
I was thinking to myself and thought, hey, I remember this poster from the DC politics board a long time ago. Sure enough, you are that poster. I liked that pro-Union post you made this morning, by the way.
That 14th Amendment conspiracy nut is exactly that. He belongs to an organization called pacinlaw.org, which is a sovereign citizens group that claims that they can remove federal citizenship from a its applicants. This is, of course, used to dodge the income tax. Their services don't work, and should not be expected to work. If you're looking to get a reservation at your local federal prison, this is a good way to get in.
The racism is pretty tame (read: very coded) compared to others, but it's good to know that I'm not the only one bothered by it.
For more info, see the The Tax Protester FAQ.
http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html
And finally, keep on rockin' in the free world, RR!
- Location: Hey RationalReaper
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2448666216
I never got a direct response from that, but in his/her later posts I can tell that the message was received loud and clear.
Below, I try to instigate a fight with other honest yet morally abhorrent posters.
Re:I disagree with the rational reaper but I would never flag his post
Date: 2011-06-21, 4:44PM EDT
Reply to:
your anonymous craigslist address will appear here
I'm not the flagger. Don't get me twisted. But:
Do you ever think that you're being flagged because of your use of racial epithets (wetback)? It's against terms of use to use them, so I can see why someone would want to flag you because of it. Perhaps you can tone down your posts, or if you must use them, post it in Rants and Raves?
But yeah, I'm pretty sure that RationalReaper isn't the flagger. He's simply not cunty enough. I really think it's that 14th Amendment dude. I have been following this section long enough to believe that he uses an Autopost/flagging program to give himself free reign over the section. It's so irritating to see him post large blocks of tired and failed arguments over and over. Even a cunt like RationalReaper can trash his spam arguments in one post., but that doesn't stop 14th amendment dude because he gets paid to post.
To the 14th Amendment poster - FUCK OFF AND DIE. NOBODY WANTS YOUR SHITTY SERVICES.
----------------------------------
I disagree with the rational reaper but I would never flag his post (I'm against jobstealing wetbacks)
I posted the post calling him a knucklehead for having his own trademark which has been up for days. All my other posts have been flagged. I know for a fact that one flagger is the 14th amendment dude and their are many other pussies that flag liberal and conservative because they can't stand LOSING an argument like a sissy. I might not like what someone's say's but I will fight like a motherfucker for their right to say it SO PUSSY FLAGGERS, MAN UP if you can and let people with opposing opinions post. Only bolsheviks want one opinion.
Location: I'm against jobstealing wetbacks
it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2454199023
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2454300233
Below: RJ makes a dumb post. It's self explanatory.
Re: Oklahoma sovereignty (old news)
Date: 2011-06-22, 11:46PM EDT
Reply to: see below
WOW!!! Old news is so exciting!
Too bad you can't get your resolutions and laws straight.
They still accept federal funding, and they're certainly not going to follow Pacinlaw's game plan, moron!
But hey, you're a stupid motherfucker, you can do whatever the hell you want with your own money, I'm not gonna stop you. Just don't be surprised when it doesn't work out at all.
-----------
Oklahoma as a "SOVEREIGN" STATE (Kicking Ass and Taking Names!!!!)
Date: 2011-06-22, 10:06PM EDT
Reply to: comm-cup2a-2457043670@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
Seems to me like 14th Amendment guy might know something we don't! I will searching out Pac in Law
________________________________________________________________________________________
Several weeks ago, Oklahoma passed a law, declaring Oklahoma as a Sovereign state, not under the Federal Government directives. Joining Texas , Montana and Utah as the only states to do so.
More states are likely to follow: Louisiana, Alabama , Georgia , the Carolina 's, Tennessee , Kentucky , Missouri , Arkansas , West Virginia , Mississippi , Florida . Save your confederate money, it appears the South is about to rise up once again. HJR 1003
Kicking Ass and Taking Names!!!!
Location: Kicking Ass and Taking Names!!!!
it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2457043670
- Location: old news
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2457171251
That post was flagged because RJ couldn't admit that he is a moron.
re: Where do you profit from the 14th Amendment RR? (rationalreaper™)
Date: 2011-06-18, 5:05PM EDT
Reply to: see below [Errors when replying to ads?]
That doesn't matter one iota...whether or not I profit or not from the 14th amendment.What matters is it does exist...it was ratified and adopted by three fourths of the states.
What matters is people like you who blatantly lie about such things.Now you are claiming there is no 14th amendment..and it was never ratified.
You can't re-write history or laws to suit what you would like to be history and law.
What you can do is try to amend the amendment and change the law if you dislike it so much.
That's all there is to it...you are lying and I am proving that you are lying.
I get nothing out of it other than to set the record straight by posting the record.
It's just like....Paul Revere was not a courier...did not ring bells and fire shots on his route from Boston to Virginia to warn the Resistance that the British were coming.
He was on a stealth mission...it was not his intent to draw attention to himself.It was not his intent to warn the British that we were going to put up a fight and not let them take our guns.
You teabaggers make fools of yourselves when you say stoopid (<--- spelled incorrectly on purpose) things like this.
BTW...Sarah had no excuse for her idiocy....she had just had just attended a tour in Boston on Beacon Hill where the tour guide instructed everyone on the facts of Paul Revere's historical ride.
She obviously wasn't listening...or she has a severe handicap when it comes to comprehension.Yet she claims the reporter slipped a "Gotcha" question in just to trip her up.
No....She just doesn't know what the fuck she is talking about half of the time.
Just like the nut job trying to get everyone to believe there is no 14th amendment.
RR™
- Location: rationalreaper™
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2448675265
A minor nitpick: RJ isn't a teabagger. The Tea Party isn't that extreme (unless RationalReaper knows something that I don't).
Below: RJ reprises his position.
2re: Where do you profit from the 14th Amendment RR? (rationalreaper™)
Date: 2011-06-18, 9:40PM EDT
Reply to: see below [Errors when replying to ads?]
Nut Job Who Believes what He Was Taught In "STATE" Run Public School System! LMAO!! You Actually Believe rather than Investigate Yourself the HISTORICAL TRUTH of The 14th Amendment. Leave Your Name Please so that I may sell you a Bridge Real Close to your Nut House that You Escaped from!!
The 14th DOES NOT EXIST Jack Ass. There is NOTHING to Amend, You Can't amend something that does not exist. Of course I'll Post the Real Truth and when your Feelings are hurt that I proved you wrong you'll flag it! So I'll just repost the Historical Proof Over and Over Again. Haven't you Learned Yet? I have spent two years Happily reposting every posting you've deleted.
By you Just Saying that the 14th Amendment was Raitified (not) and throwing out a Date DOES NOT Make the 14th Amendment Ratified.
Where within this unlawful, illgetimate private law system do you profit from the 14th, (poster of "re: The 14th Amendment (rationalreaper™)") The 14th is a Fraud on the American People to enslave and control people of the Republic (taxes, licences, permits, fines, fees, ect.)(Control)
"Senator Doolittle from Wisconsin quoting all the daily statements from the Senate said to wit: "What is said every day; the people of the South have rejected the constitutional amendment, and therefore we will march upon them and force them to adopt it at the point of the bayonet, and establish military power over them until they do adopt it" (See The Congressional Globe Feb 20th 1867 page 1644) This was not just talk for history bears out that they did what they said they would do" The Reconstruction Acts should be evidence enough.
"Like the Utah State Supreme Court in 1968 stated in the case called Dyett v Turner "We feel like slaves in a galley" Now, is that any way for a Court to feel? Is that any way for a Nation to operate?
It will also be remembered that Article V required the willful votes of the State Legislatures, and forbids the deprivation of State suffrage unless such States consent. Guns pointed at their heads can not be considered consent. Not to mention the surrogate government sent in with military support to take out of office the properly elected office holders. There can be no proper replacement of an office holder unless the one moved out is "properly" taken out (see Hoke v. Henderson , Brown et el. v. Board of Levee Commissioner, and White v. White 5 Barb NY 474 1849)
First and absolute foremost, the attacks and evasion on the Southern States were done without "Due Process of Law, so this whole problem is a judicial question since due process is a strict virtue of the Courts.
Did the government provide Due Process when taking life liberty and property from the States and it's peoples in 1861 and thereafter?
It will be remembered that Jeremiah Black, the Attorney General prior to the time that options were being searched out, plainly stated that it would be illegal to invade the States unless they went through the Courts. He further elaborated that if the States were to be treated like enemies then they could retaliate in what ever form they felt necessary, and that ". . . if Congress shall break up the present Union, by unconstitutionally putting strife and enmity and armed hostility between different sections of the country, instead of the domestic tranquility which the Constitution was meant to insure, will not all the States be absolved from their federal obligations?. . . then the Union must utterly perish at the moment when Congress shall arm one part of the people against another for any purpose beyond that of merely protecting the general government in the exercise of its proper constitutional functions." (See Official Opinions of Attorneys General of the United States Vol. 9 page 516 through 526.) What Jeremiah Black said would be the official opinion of the United States Government according to section 25 of the 1789 Judiciary Act. What branch of government took heed or even gave it any rank at all. While this is strictly a due process question yet the Court has hid behind a fraudulent wall called "It's a political Question" Where in the history of Due Process can it ever be called a political question when due process is strictly a judicial function?
Any new meaning of Due Process later than the founded definition at the time it was placed in the United States Constitution in 1790 will have to go through Article V to be constitutionally accepted. So, Post war changes have no standings such as the arrogance of Hurtado v. Calf. 110 U.S. 516 (1884) stating that a grand jury would not be necessary "so long as the rest of the trial is fair". However, even when the Courts has alluded the question concerning the 14th Amendment by using this wall, and saying it can not rule on the issue, I find it contradictory that the Court has made rulings concerning the validity of an amendment five times.(See Hollingsworth v. Virginia, 3 Dall., 378 1798, ; Hawke v. Smith, 253 U.S. 231 1920; Rhode Island v. Palmer, 253 U.S.; Dillion v. Gloss, 256 U.S. 368, and United States v. Sprague, 282 U.S. 716 1931) Such actions taken by the Court negates any trust in them when they turn around and select a time and an amendment that it wants to claim it has no authority to rule on.
The damages caused by the fraudulent teachings in the public schools has severed away the common knowledge from the people in such abundance for so long that one would have to leave his own generational time table and study past the public memory The modern plenitude that over whams the commuting elements in the people has dismantled necessary public reasoning to such a point that their votes have nothing but numerical value. At these so called elections there is no sound minds to consult with as to what policies would be preferred from these people since the policies are already been pre-stored in them by the educating institutions. Furthermore the people seem to be classed as ens legis rather than natural persons.
A final note concerning the Law of Nations. In Article 1 section 8 clause 10 it states to wit: To define and punish. . . offenses against the Law of Nations. It will be remembered that this "Law of Nations named out here spoke only of the one written by Emmerich de Vattel written in 1758 and was thereby fully incorporated in our Constitution word for word as stated by John Jay to all the Grand Juries he instructed around the Circuits. This seems to be totally ignored insomuch that The Law of Nations has not been practiced as it should. Again, any law contrary to the Law of Nations is Contrary to the Constitution and against the Several States. New International law that was supposingly accepted, but in direct contradiction to Vattels Law of Nations has no binding force because no office holder of any level is authorized to pass legislation (Legislation, not the same as The Law of the Land, see Westervelt v. Gregg 12 NY 209) against the Constitution rather international or domestic. I remind you again that changing the Constitution can only be done through the proper use of Article V, which there has never been an Amendment to nullify Article 1 Section 8 concerning this great part of our laws (See, United States v. Smith 5 Wheat. 153, 160, 162 (1820) ; The Marianna Flora, 11 Wheat 1, 40-41 (1826); and United States v. Brig. Malek Abhel, 2 How. 210, 232, (1844), yet the present government violates every portion of it. The importance of this may be recognized by your office or it may not, but I thought it should be brought up even though I will not at this time be elaborating about the connection of this to the other problems mentioned above.
If States Rights are destroyed then so is the government (See Kidd v. Pearson, 247 US 75-276)
Since the 14th Amendment did not ratify, then first and foremost there is no such thing as a United Sates Citizen as defined in post Civil war doctrines ( See Ex Parte Knowles, 5 Cal. 300, 302 1855).
http://www.14th-amendment.com/
http://republicvsdemocracy.org/
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2449058150
tl;dr. Fun fact, if one were to search for each and every court case mentioned, it often returns sovereign citizen sources. Without putting too much effort into this,
Ex Parte Knowles and
Kidd v. Pearson are irrelevant to the argument.
30 some odd minutes later RJ repeats himself once more. I deleted it in the sake of brevity. You're not missing much.
re: 14th Amendment...if I'm wrong...why do you keep deleting? (rationalreaper™)
Date: 2011-06-18, 11:17PM EDT
Reply to: see below [Errors when replying to ads?]
Jackass....you must have been home schooled by a parent with a 5th grade equivalency.
Really....If I am wrong....why have you pounced and deleted 4 of these messages?
I'll tell you why...because I am not wrong...I am right....and you're with pacinlaw and if everyone knows you folks are lying sacks of shit....they'll stop sending you money.
Nice people you are....giving those people who are a little slow, misinformation...just to further your corrupt greedy agenda.
Some of the information you pass out can land people in jail if they follow your advice.
Show me you're not desperate and let this post stay up.
I'm just going to keep re-posting it every time you run your flagging software anyway.
I guess you don't like the truth very much.Typical of a teabagging Goper
This copy is carried in the breast pockets or pocketbooks of most congressional reps...or so they claim.
The GENUINE ARTICLE........Now why would the 14th Amendment be printed in every publishing of the United States Constitution if it doesn't exist?
Do you really think people are going to take the claims of a few racial,radical right wing evangelical websites saying the 14th Amendment was never ratified?
Now I realize that you hate the idea of non-whites having the same privileges as whites.....but no matter how hard you try to re-write history.....it aint happening.
Read it and accept the things you cannot change.
RR™
AMENDMENT XIV
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.
Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Section 2.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,* and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
Section 3.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Section 4.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
Section 5.
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
That doesn't matter one iota...whether or not I profit or not from the 14th amendment.What matters is it does exist...it was ratified and adopted by three fourths of the states.
What matters is people like you who blatantly lie about such things.Now you are claiming there is no 14th amendment..and it was never ratified.
You can't re-write history or laws to suit what you would like to be history and law.
What you can do is try to amend the amendment and change the law if you dislike it so much.
That's all there is to it...you are lying and I am proving that you are lying.
I get nothing out of it other than to set the record straight by posting the record.
It's just like....Paul Revere was not a courier...did not ring bells and fire shots on his route from Boston to Lexington to warn the Resistance that the British were coming.
He was on a stealth mission...it was not his intent to draw attention to himself.It was not his intent to warn the British that we were going to put up a fight and not let them take our guns.
You teabaggers make fools of yourselves when you say stoopid (<--- spelled incorrectly on purpose) things like this.
BTW...Sarah had no excuse for her idiocy....she had just had just attended a tour in Boston on Beacon Hill where the tour guide instructed everyone on the facts of Paul Revere's historical ride.
She obviously wasn't listening...or she has a severe handicap when it comes to comprehension.Yet she claims the reporter slipped a "Gotcha" question in just to trip her up.
No....She just doesn't know what the fuck she is talking about half of the time.
Just like the nut job trying to get everyone to believe there is no 14th amendment.
RR™
- Location: rationalreaper™
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2449156198
Two walls arguing with themselves. 20 minutes later, RR adds this and reposts it in the morning after it was flagged off. A slightly more unique post post from RR.
Here is the order in which the 14th amendment was ratified (rationalreaper™)
Date: 2011-06-18, 11:34PM EDT
Reply to: comm-yt7dj-2449171026@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
The entire Us Constitution with all of it's articles and amentments...in it's complete entirety...can be found right here http://www.constitutionus.com
The fourteenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States was proposed to the legislatures of the several States by the Thirty-ninth Congress, on the 13th of June, 1866. It was declared, in a certificate of the Secretary of State dated July 28, 1868 to have been ratified by the legislatures of 28 of the 37 States. The dates of ratification were: Connecticut, June 25, 1866; New Hampshire, July 6, 1866; Tennessee, July 19, 1866; New Jersey, September 11, 1866 (subsequently the legislature rescinded its ratification, and on March 24, 1868, readopted its resolution of rescission over the Governor's veto, and on Nov. 12, 1980, expressed support for the amendment); Oregon, September 19, 1866 (and rescinded its ratification on October 15, 1868); Vermont, October 30, 1866; Ohio, January 4, 1867 (and rescinded its ratification on January 15, 1868); New York, January 10, 1867; Kansas, January 11, 1867; Illinois, January 15, 1867; West Virginia, January 16, 1867; Michigan, January 16, 1867; Minnesota, January 16, 1867; Maine, January 19, 1867; Nevada, January 22, 1867; Indiana, January 23, 1867; Missouri, January 25, 1867; Rhode Island, February 7, 1867; Wisconsin, February 7, 1867; Pennsylvania, February 12, 1867; Massachusetts, March 20, 1867; Nebraska, June 15, 1867; Iowa, March 16, 1868; Arkansas, April 6, 1868; Florida, June 9, 1868; North Carolina, July 4, 1868 (after having rejected it on December 14, 1866); Louisiana, July 9, 1868 (after having rejected it on February 6, 1867); South Carolina, July 9, 1868 (after having rejected it on December 20, 1866).
Ratification was completed on July 9, 1868.
The amendment was subsequently ratified by Alabama, July 13, 1868; Georgia, July 21, 1868 (after having rejected it on November 9, 1866); Virginia, October 8, 1869 (after having rejected it on January 9, 1867); Mississippi, January 17, 1870; Texas, February 18, 1870 (after having rejected it on October 27, 1866); Delaware, February 12, 1901 (after having rejected it on February 8, 1867); Maryland, April 4, 1959 (after having rejected it on March 23, 1867); California, May 6, 1959; Kentucky, March 18, 1976 (after having rejected it on January 8, 1867). amendment 14
You're welcome
I could sense your feeling of relief and the burden of having to carry such a heavy lie on your shoulders being lifted.
RR™
rationalreaper™ LMAO!! Others KNOW Ur GAME!! (OTHERS DELETING Ur POST!! LOL!!!!!!!!)
Date: 2011-06-19, 1:29PM EDT
Reply to: comm-nq6yg-2449775899@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
Dear rationalreaper™ ;
The People KNOW You Are Full Of Shit and Others Are Deleting Your Postings!! LMAO!! Too Freakin Funny!!
I could give a damn whether your postings are there or not. Matter of Fact, I post yours with mine at times. I have NOTHING to Hide but to Expose You for who you are. You See, I trust in the American People to fight off Communism and the Likes of You.
Thank you ALL for your emails and Your Support. The Links have been hitting heavy from this site and this guy has NO IDEA what kind of Attention he is bring to the Scam of the 14th amendment. We Have More hits today than all of Last week alone. We Continue to Educate the Masses!! Thank You All, Once Again!!
- Location: OTHERS DELETING Ur POST!! LOL!!!!!!!!
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2449775899
Furthermore:
re; reaping the rational thought of man! (Where is the Republic?)
Date: 2011-06-19, 4:19PM EDT
Reply to: comm-4tsnz-2450047956@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
I pledge alligiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the REPUBLIC for which it STANDS! Hey rationreaper where is this Republic and what placed it under the feet of Demo cracy? Forget your quibble with paclaw and answer my question! Was it the 1930 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Bankruptcy Act ? Where is the REPUBLIC and WHEN was it replaced! If you can not answer this question you will be exposed as a traitor to the Constitution of the Republic! If you do not address this question you will be exposed as a traitor to the Republic! I Am not affiliated with Paclaw I Am in my Fathers House seeking your light that you claim is in the Fathers House! Show Me the Light of Truth of where the Republic is! Rational Reaper what are the spirits within your moniker? With all that rational you should easily be able to tell me where is the Republic?
- Location: Where is the Republic?
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2450047956
Yeah, I don't think so. How can you claim that you have more hits if you're not affiliated with PACinlaw? That's just retarded.
A Republic?Democracy? or Pandoras Box? (rationalreaper™)
Date: 2011-06-19, 5:34PM EDT
Reply to: see below [Errors when replying to ads?]
First off...don't demand that I answer this question as if you've been badgering me to answer it.This is the 1st time you've brought it up.
Personally...I think we are neither a Republic nor a Democracy at this stage of our existance or in the true sense of meaning of either word..A Repubublic is a charter that governs the majority...a Democracy is a majority rules based government. And while we do have elections based upon a majority outcome....seldom do the people see what the majority has voted on,ever take effect as law.
In that sense...we are more of a Republic in that a small charter of wealthy individuals and corporatists who use brokers(Lobbyists) to purchase the law they desire...whereas by definition A Democracy would have laws and governance based upon the will of the majority.
The Pledge of Allegiance was a poem witten by a " Socialist Baptist Minister "....so even though I myself and my children have been raised Pledging Allegiance to our flag........politically it has no merit.
It is nothing more than a way to recite aloud our love and patriotism for our country.
Below you will read a bit about the author of the Pedge of allegiance.
That is as far as I am willing to go in discussing this matter that has been an ongoing argument for a couple of hundred years.
RR™
Francis Bellamy (1855 - 1931), a Baptist minister, wrote the original Pledge in August 1892. He was a Christian Socialist. In his Pledge, he is expressing the ideas of his first cousin, Edward Bellamy, author of the American socialist utopian novels, Looking Backward (1888) and Equality (1897).
Francis Bellamy in his sermons and lectures and Edward Bellamy in his novels and articles described in detail how the middle class could create a planned economy with political, social and economic equality for all. The government would run a peace time economy similar to our present military industrial complex.
The Pledge was published in the September 8th issue of The Youth's Companion, the leading family magazine and the Reader's Digest of its day. Its owner and editor, Daniel Ford, had hired Francis in 1891 as his assistant when Francis was pressured into leaving his baptist church in Boston because of his socialist sermons. As a member of his congregation, Ford had enjoyed Francis's sermons. Ford later founded the liberal and often controversial Ford Hall Forum, located in downtown Boston.
In 1892 Francis Bellamy was also a chairman of a committee of state superintendents of education in the National Education Association. As its chairman, he prepared the program for the public schools' quadricentennial celebration for Columbus Day in 1892. He structured this public school program around a flag raising ceremony and a flag salute - his 'Pledge of Allegiance.'
His original Pledge read as follows: 'I pledge allegiance to my Flag and (to*) the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.' He considered placing the word, 'equality,' in his Pledge, but knew that the state superintendents of education on his committee were against equality for women and African Americans. [ * 'to' added in October, 1892. ]
Dr. Mortimer Adler, American philosopher and last living founder of the Great Books program at Saint John's College, has analyzed these ideas in his book, The Six Great Ideas. He argues that the three great ideas of the American political tradition are 'equality, liberty and justice for all.' 'Justice' mediates between the often conflicting goals of 'liberty' and 'equality.'
In 1923 and 1924 the National Flag Conference, under the 'leadership of the American Legion and the Daughters of the American Revolution, changed the Pledge's words, 'my Flag,' to 'the Flag of the United States of America.' Bellamy disliked this change, but his protest was ignored.
In 1954, Congress after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, added the words, 'under God,' to the Pledge. The Pledge was now both a patriotic oath and a public prayer.
Bellamy's granddaughter said he also would have resented this second change. He had been pressured into leaving his church in 1891 because of his socialist sermons. In his retirement in Florida, he stopped attending church because he disliked the racial bigotry he found there.
What follows is Bellamy's own account of some of the thoughts that went through his mind in August, 1892, as he picked the words of his Pledge:
It began as an intensive communing with salient points of our national history, from the Declaration of Independence onwards; with the makings of the Constitution...with the meaning of the Civil War; with the aspiration of the people...
The true reason for allegiance to the Flag is the 'republic for which it stands.' ...And what does that vast thing, the Republic mean? It is the concise political word for the Nation - the One Nation which the Civil War was fought to prove. To make that One Nation idea clear, we must specify that it is indivisible, as Webster and Lincoln used to repeat in their great speeches. And its future?
Just here arose the temptation of the historic slogan of the French Revolution which meant so much to Jefferson and his friends, 'Liberty, equality, fraternity.' No, that would be too fanciful, too many thousands of years off in realization. But we as a nation do stand square on the doctrine of liberty and justice for all...
If the Pledge's historical pattern repeats, its words will be modified during this decade. Below are two possible changes.
Some prolife advocates recite the following slightly revised Pledge: 'I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all, born and unborn.'
A few liberals recite a slightly revised version of Bellamy's original Pledge: 'I pledge allegiance to my Flag, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with equality, liberty and justice for all.'
- Location: rationalreaper™
it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
re; oh yeah you forgot to answer the Question! (Where is the Republic & when did it go?)
Date: 2011-06-19, 5:44PM EDT
Reply to: comm-rnjkz-2450174615@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
Someones running from the Light and won't answer the question!
- Location: Where is the Republic & when did it go?
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2450174615
So you don't know where the Republic went Aye! (Where is Common Constitutional Law?)
Date: 2011-06-19, 7:57PM EDT
Reply to: comm-jnztt-2450358006@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
Nice try wise guy, you skirted the issue fairly well. The pledge of alligiance is irrelavent, we used to be a Republic governed under COMMON Constitutional law! When did the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA move to English jurisprudence law where the headquarters of the Bar Association is in England! Where is the REPUBLIC?
- Location: Where is Common Constitutional Law?
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2450358006
Lame conspiracy theory.
Being as I am not a scholar of the United States Constitution (rationalreaper™)
Date: 2011-06-19, 10:24PM EDT
Reply to: see below [Errors when replying to ads?]
It is my understanding that the term " Republic" was used by most southern states and a few northern states...NH,Ma,RI...maybe NY(?) as a way to declare states rights and sovereignty/autonomy in order to prevent Federal Mandates and laws from becoming the last word in law and thus taking control over all states laws from criminal to commerce to corporate litigation to civil action.
The battle for these rights continues to this day.
Having just given a more than cursory look just now into our constitution and have not found in the framework or body of the text of the constitution declaring the United States a Republic. But then...I'm not saying it is not in there...I just didn't see it if it is....have a difficult time with my bifocals.
That said...I did not do an in depth scouring of the constitution either.
I've also read a few articles from right and left wing historians...and it appears that it is really a "States Rights" issue. Which I happen to agree with to a certain extent.
I managed to get myself pissed off by reading some words by Winston Churchill....A British Citizen claiming America was a Republic.
To that I say.....what gives Churchill or any other foreigner the right to describe our government or to try to shape the politics of our government?
I am always amazed that after fighting to cut our ties from the British Empire, to gain our Liberty,Freedom,sovereignty and autonomy as our own nation.....we have still allowed the Brits to shape our laws.
(off topic) And we all know that the British Empire spread itself way too thin and is now only a fraction of it's former self as a global power.....and here we are...doing the exact same things that have crumbled every empire throughout history.
(now back to topic)
I'd say the Republic has not gone anywhere although it is misused quite often. Democracy?...if one can call our general elections a Democracy....that too is misused.
There are obvious overlapping factors of both types of government in this nation....but for the most part....neither really does anything to promote a government " Of the People, For the People and By the People ".
It most certainly will take more than a few bi-partisans with PHDs in Constitutional law to set this conversation going in the correct direction.
I do not come anywhere near to qualifying as having enough knowledge to take on such a serious debate. I have my concepts and Ideas as to what things in the constitution mean....but when 5 supreme court justices can claim that a corporation is the same as a private citizen....well maybe my anger gets in the way of having a productive , unbiased, discussion on such matters as these.
Perhaps due to the individuality of free thinking people and the brainwashed lock step partisan participants....issues such as this one may never come to a satisfactory conclusion that can be agreed upon by all or most.
I like the idea of being a Republic and a Democracy. They say you can't have both....I say for appearances sake....politics has tried to give the impression that we have both.
Whatever it is that we do have.....It began to fail around 1957....IMHO.
RR™
- Location: rationalreaper™
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2450550463
Good God, RR. Don't put that much effort into this!
BOSTON CL HAS BEEN INFECTED BY A COWARDLY FLAGGOT INFECTION (BY A FLAG QUEEN WHOSE UNCLE GAVE HIM TOO)
Date: 2011-06-20, 12:19PM EDT
Reply to: comm-shm4m-2451388971@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
MANY BATHS AS A YOUNGSTER. THIS IS HIS WAY OF GETTING BACK AT THE WORLD. HE MASTURBATES WHILE HE FLAGS. FALLS ASLEEP AND THEN NEW POSTS STAY ON FOR A LITTLE WHILE TIL HE WAKES UP AND THE WHOLE CYCLE STARTS AGAIN.
- Location: BY A FLAG QUEEN WHOSE UNCLE GAVE HIM TOO
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2451388971
lol.
RE; Why would someone flag this neutral post? (rationalreaper™) (The States are Republics)
Date: 2011-06-20, 11:15PM EDT
Reply to: comm-qqjp2-2452858789@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
The States are Republics
Alexander Hamilton, the main architect of the Constitution for the United States of America, set forth in Federalist Paper number 9 that all the states are republics in the United States federation;
"As this Government is composed of small republics, it enjoys the internal happiness of each."
These several republics have their own nationality and citizenship; but they have been interfered with by the United States and its 14th Amendment and legislation. The subversive system operates off something called cooperative federalism. There are other words for this that obfuscate the actual political plan: the common one being termed Democracy". The blueprint for its operation was drafted by Karl Marx.
The 14th Amendment created a De facto system
Having an altternate political system creates if not a new, but alternate, governmental system. Due to that fact that a new "political body" was created by the "national" or "federal" citizenship, the governmental system under the 14th Amendment is "de facto". To create a whole new system, a different constitution would have had to been installed.
To help delineate the difference between a Republic Form of Government" in contrast to what a what a Democracy" is the Federalist Papers. The Federalist Papers were written and published during the years 1787 and 1788 in several New York State newspapers as public notice in order to persuade New York voters to buy into the proposed constitution. The primary authors were Alexander Hamilton and James Madison with help from John Jay. In total, the Federalist Papers contains 85 essays outlining how this "new government" would operate and why this type of government was the best choice for The Untied States of America. All of the essays were signed "PUBLIUS" and the actual authors of some are under dispute, but the general consensus is that Hamilton wrote 52, Madison wrote 28, and Jay contributed the remaining 5. Moreover, to help delineate the differences between a Republic Form of Government from a Democracy, definitions from Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1856, will also be reference within the links below. This particular legal reference is utilized as it is more pure in definitional nature. Through research, it can be seen that current dictionaries have been altered -to a point- and also somewhat vague in their definitions. On its face, these issues appear to serve as evidence of a plot, or conspiracy.
In reference thereof , that the author of the Federalist Papers, especially Alexander Hamilton, were staunch elitist, as were all "Federalist". Accordingly to understand the philosophy of a Republic Form of Government as compared to a so-called Democracy, one must turn to the Federalist Papers as a primary source of reference. These papers show the intent of the rulers and their plans to form a "central government" for the American union under the Constitution for the Untied State of America.
It should be noted that currently we do not have a pure representative democracy (republican government). This is due to a breach of parameters which had been set forth in the Federalist Papers of which purview through the Constitution for the United States of America.
Research and References;
Republic vs. Democracy
http://www.pacinlaw.org/republic/
The Origin of Sovereign Citizen
http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/Origin_Sovereign_Citizens.php
Law Of Persons
http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/law/Sohms_Law_of_Persons.php
Other Helpful Links
Some Questions: http://www.pacinlaw.org/questions
Citizen Legal Fiction: http://www.pacinlaw.org/citizen
Dual System of Law: http://www.pacinlaw.org/dual
Historical Error: http://www.pacinlaw.org/error
Deprogramming http://www.deprogram.us/deprogramming/
Island Makers http://www.islandmakers.us/demons
PAC Tour http://www.pacinlaw.org/tour/
___________________________________________________________________________________________ Why would someone flag this neutral post? (rationalreaper™) Date: 2011-06-20, 10:16AM EDT Being that I am not a Constitutional Scholar...I can only offer my interpretation of what I think has happened. It is my understanding that the term " Republic" was used by most southern states and a few northern states...NH,Ma,RI...maybe NY(?) as a way to declare states rights and sovereignty/autonomy in order to prevent Federal Mandates and laws from becoming the last word in law and thus taking control over all states laws from criminal to commerce to corporate litigation to civil action. The battle for these rights continues to this day. Having just given a more than cursory look just now into our constitution and have not found in the framework or body of the text of the constitution declaring the United States a Republic. But then...I'm not saying it is not in there...I just didn't see it if it is....have a difficult time with my bifocals. That said...I did not do an in depth scouring of the constitution either. I've also read a few articles from right and left wing historians...and it appears that it is really a "States Rights" issue. Which I happen to agree with to a certain extent. I managed to get myself pissed off by reading some words by Winston Churchill....A British Citizen claiming America was a Republic. To that I say.....what gives Churchill or any other foreigner the right to describe our government or to try to shape the politics of our government? I am always amazed that after fighting to cut our ties from the British Empire, to gain our Liberty,Freedom,sovereignty and autonomy as our own nation.....we have still allowed the Brits to shape our laws. (off topic) And we all know that the British Empire spread itself way too thin and is now only a fraction of it's former self as a global power.....and here we are...doing the exact same things that have crumbled every empire throughout history. (now back to topic) I'd say the Republic has not gone anywhere although it is misused quite often. Democracy?...if one can call our general elections a Democracy....that too is misused. There are obvious overlapping factors of both types of government in this nation....but for the most part....neither really does anything to promote a government " Of the People, For the People and By the People ". It most certainly will take more than a few bi-partisans with PHDs in Constitutional law to set this conversation going in the correct direction. I do not come anywhere near to qualifying as having enough knowledge to take on such a serious debate. I have my concepts and Ideas as to what things in the constitution mean....but when 5 supreme court justices can claim that a corporation is the same as a private citizen....well maybe my anger gets in the way of having a productive , unbiased, discussion on such matters as these. Perhaps due to the individuality of free thinking people and the brainwashed lock step partisan participants....issues such as this one may never come to a satisfactory conclusion that can be agreed upon by all or most. I like the idea of being a Republic and a Democracy. They say you can't have both....I say for appearances sake....politics has tried to give the impression that we have both. Whatever it is that we do have.....It began to fail around 1957....IMHO. RR™
- Location: The States are Republics
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2452858789
I have nothing to do with the post below.
through the process of elimination the flagger is the guy who is (arguing with the rational reaper)
Date: 2011-06-20, 11:48PM EDT
Reply to: comm-yc72q-2452897188@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
The 14th amendment dude. Everytime he comes on FLAG HIM! the punk
- Location: arguing with the rational reaper
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2452897188
Though to be honest, I have been flagging Ron Paul posts. It's good to know that it has paid off.
RE; Why would someone flag this neutral post? (rationalreaper™) (The States are Republics)
Date: 2011-06-21, 1:40PM EDT
Reply to: comm-ngx6r-2453841844@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
FIRST, Thank You For All Your Emails! I have answered some and I will get back to each and everyone of you! Meanwhile Continue to Visit the Web Site below!! Please feel free to go PAC's Forum with any questions you may have! http://www.notmygovernment.us/forum/
The States are Republics
Alexander Hamilton, the main architect of the Constitution for the United States of America, set forth in Federalist Paper number 9 that all the states are republics in the United States federation;
"As this Government is composed of small republics, it enjoys the internal happiness of each."
These several republics have their own nationality and citizenship; but they have been interfered with by the United States and its 14th Amendment and legislation. The subversive system operates off something calledcooperative federalism. There are other words for this that obfuscate the actual political plan: the common one being termed Democracy". The blueprint for its operation was drafted by Karl Marx.
The 14th Amendment created a De facto system
Having an altternate political system creates if not a new, but alternate, governmental system. Due to that fact that a new "political body" was created by the "national" or "federal" citizenship, the governmental system under the 14th Amendment is "de facto". To create a whole new system, a different constitution would have had to been installed.
To help delineate the difference between a Republic Form of Government" in contrast to what a what a Democracy" is the Federalist Papers. The Federalist Papers were written and published during the years 1787 and 1788 in several New York State newspapers as public notice in order to persuade New York voters to buy into the proposed constitution. The primary authors were Alexander Hamilton and James Madison with help from John Jay. In total, the Federalist Papers contains 85 essays outlining how this "new government" would operate and why this type of government was the best choice for The Untied States of America. All of the essays were signed "PUBLIUS" and the actual authors of some are under dispute, but the general consensus is that Hamilton wrote 52, Madison wrote 28, and Jay contributed the remaining 5. Moreover, to help delineate the differences between a Republic Form of Government from a Democracy, definitions from Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1856, will also be reference within the links below. This particular legal reference is utilized as it is more pure in definitional nature. Through research, it can be seen that current dictionaries have been altered -to a point- and also somewhat vague in their definitions. On its face, these issues appear to serve as evidence of a plot, or conspiracy.
In reference thereof , that the author of the Federalist Papers, especially Alexander Hamilton, were staunch elitist, as were all "Federalist". Accordingly to understand the philosophy of a Republic Form of Government as compared to a so-called Democracy, one must turn to the Federalist Papers as a primary source of reference. These papers show the intent of the rulers and their plans to form a "central government" for the American union under the Constitution for the Untied State of America.
It should be noted that currently we do not have a pure representative democracy (republican government). This is due to a breach of parameters which had been set forth in the Federalist Papers of which purview through the Constitution for the United States of America.
Research
Republic vs. Democracy
http://www.pacinlaw.org/republic/
The Origin of Sovereign Citizen
http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/Origin_Sovereign_Citizens.php_
- Location: The States are Republics
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2453841844
I'm pretty sure I have countered the misuse of Founding Father quotes before.
Below: RJ wisens up and tries to deflect negative attention.
RE; I disagree with the rational reaper (DUMB ASS) ((YOUR ONE In THE SAME PERSON! Jack Ass!)
Date: 2011-06-21, 4:59PM EDT
Reply to: comm-yddue-2454334166@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
Psychopaths and Narcissists Thrive on Attention, and will create drama just to be in the middle of it, and attempt to misdirect others off their sickness.
"HEY", That Sounds Like a AGENT PROVATEUR
Your Sick rational reaper, Nice Try Sick-O. You Should see a Doctor for your Sickness. You're CraigsList Very Own AGENT PROVOCATEUR!!
Are You New At this Agent Provocateur thing, Because you Suck at it, and For Sake Of Arguement rationalreaper TM(LOL)( AGENT PROVOCATEUR!!) The Post I am Referring to is Posted below under ALL those PACINLAW.org Links below.
DIVIDE AND CONQUER, VIA GREED // Indoctrination, Control, Fear, Threats
http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/Divide_and_Conquer.pdf PacIn Law
To explain: Due to the actions of these greedy gurus causes a divide and conquer result.
DIVIDE AND CONQUER, VIA GREED // Indoctrination, Control, Fear, Threats
http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/Divide_and_Conquer.pdf PacIn Law
http://www.pacinlaw.org/fourteenth/part_0.php
A mojority of the people of the Unites States have lived all their lives under EMERGENCY RULE . . . .
http://www.pacinlaw.org/fourteenth/part_1.php
Are You Treasonist? Treason by Design.
http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/Treason_by_Design.pdf
Republic vs. Democracy
http://www.pacinlaw.org/republic/
The Origin of Sovereign Citizen
http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/Origin_Sovereign_Citizens.php
Law Of Persons
http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/law/Sohms_Law_of_Persons.php
Other Helpful Links
Some Questions: http://www.pacinlaw.org/questions
Citizen Legal Fiction: http://www.pacinlaw.org/citizen
Dual System of Law: http://www.pacinlaw.org/dual
Historical Error: http://www.pacinlaw.org/error
Deprogramming http://www.deprogram.us/deprogramming/
Island Makers http://www.islandmakers.us/demons
PAC Tour http://www.pacinlaw.org/tour/
_____________________________________________________________________________
I disagree with the rational reaper but I would never flag his post (I'm against jobstealing wetbacks)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 2011-06-21, 4:01PM EDT
Reply to: comm-prreu-2454199023[Errors when replying to ads?]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I posted the post calling him a knucklehead for having his own trademark which has been up for days. All my other posts have been flagged. I know for a fact that one flagger is the 14th amendment dude and their are many other pussies that flag liberal and conservative because they can't stand LOSING an argument like a sissy. I might not like what someone's say's but I will fight like a motherfucker for their right to say it SO PUSSY FLAGGERS, MAN UP if you can and let people with opposing opinions post. Only bolsheviks want one opinion.
Location: I'm against jobstealing wetbacks
- Location: (YOUR ONE In THE SAME PERSON! Jack Ass!
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2454334166
AGENT PROVATEUR Deleting THEIR Own Post and Pointing Fingers (Typical Agenda!)
Date: 2011-06-21, 8:08PM EDT
Reply to: comm-tyerj-2454715897@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
AGENT PROVATEURS ("the rationalreaper™") Deleting THEIR Own Post and Pointing Fingers I also suspect CraigList themselves, from within, in the assistance of Ghosting and Deleting Blogs.
Isn't it just odd how our own Agent Provateur, ("the rationalreaper™") came around to find everyone's postings being deleted a he/she points the finger at PACINLAW for Deleting them. Can you understand how they operate now!!
Read About AGENT PROVATEUR's here; http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/Agent_Provocateur.php
I personally don't care if their post is there or not. It actually makes it easy for People to diferenchate between their LIES and what PACINLAW is attempting to do by Re-Educating the Masses from being dumb down by Governmental Run Media and the Public Fool (school) System.
The AGENT PROVATEUR's at the beginning of their Deletion are very selective to exactly what Postings they delete. Typically, they start from the Most Damaging post to their Illegitimate Government to the Least Damaging. Their FEAR is that the MASSES (You and your Family!) actually become Educated to the inner workings of their Corruption to continue their enslavement of the American People. For if the American People actually tasted what Freedom, Liberty and Due Process are, they would loose the CONTROL over the American People (COMMUNISM).
For Your Continued Education, please see links below and Thank You All For Your Emails and Log On to http://www.PacInLaw.org
DIVIDE AND CONQUER, VIA GREED // Indoctrination, Control, Fear, Threats
http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/Divide_and_Conquer.pdf PacIn Law
http://www.pacinlaw.org/fourteenth/part_0.php
A majority of the people of the Unites States have lived all their lives under EMERGENCY RULE . . . . and have NO Idea What Freedom Is! You Don't Know Because it hasn't been taste. The question is; WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?
http://www.pacinlaw.org/fourteenth/part_1.php
Are You Treasonist? Treason by Design.
http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/Treason_by_Design.pdf
Republic vs. Democracy
http://www.pacinlaw.org/republic/
The Origin of Sovereign Citizen
http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/Origin_Sovereign_Citizens.php
Law Of Persons
http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/law/Sohms_Law_of_Persons.php
Other Helpful Links
Some Questions: http://www.pacinlaw.org/questions
Citizen Legal Fiction: http://www.pacinlaw.org/citizen
Dual System of Law: http://www.pacinlaw.org/dual
Historical Error: http://www.pacinlaw.org/error
Deprogramming http://www.deprogram.us/deprogramming/
Island Makers http://www.islandmakers.us/demons
PAC Tour http://www.pacinlaw.org/tour/
- Location: Typical Agenda!
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2454715897
This post is the last post I have until the politics section ghosted itself over, Wed. Jun. 23rd 2011. I have two theories on how this happened:
- Too many people were flagging simultaneously
- CL staff finally acted on my many complaints.
Even today, bos /pol/ still looks like a smoldering crater of it's former glory.
RJ has moved onto other /pol/s like D.C. and Oklahoma. Personally, I'm not worried. He cannot go far -- I can hunt him down with this handy little search tool: site:craigslist.org "pacinlaw".
Here's a straggler from the ghosting spree:
CRAIGLIST "GHOSTING" Postings
Date: 2011-06-23, 7:31PM EDT
Reply to: see below
[Errors when replying to ads?]
Jun 23 - re Every deported illegal creates a job - (When Is The GOP Going To Create Jobs?)
Jun 18 - What's the deal with that 14th Amendment conspiracy nut? - (Hey RationalReaper)
Jun 17 - Council candidate seeking volunteers - (City of Revere) pic
sort by most recent best match
Found: 37 Displaying: 1 - 37 (taken from the opening page of Politics)
http://boston.craigslist.org/search/pol?query=+
NOTICE ABOVE HOW IT SAYS 1-37?
CRAIGLIST IS GHOSTING Any POSTING That Exposes This Communist Government. CRAIGSLIST Is Guilty Of Treason and Part Of Our Problem. Please Note Who The Traitors Are. There will be a Time were they will brought before the Proper and LAWFUL Judicial Courts For TREASON
There should be 36 more posting showing here, except they are being blocked from being seen.
They Expose this Illegitimate Government as a FRAUD.
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2458870617
U MAD
A reposting that was quickly flagged off:
Craigslist working for COMMUNISM (CraigsList and rational reaper, all AGEN)
Date: 2011-06-23, 8:45PM EDT
Reply to: see below
[Errors when replying to ads?]
CraigsList and rational reaper, all AGENT PROVATEUR'S (Craigslist working for COMMUNISM)
I disagree with the rational reaper ( he works for Craiglist for COMMUNIST EXPANSION)
------------------------------
-
Psychopaths and Narcissists Thrive on Attention, and will create drama just to be in the middle of it, and attempt to misdirect others off from their sickness.
"HEY", That Sounds Just Like a AGENT PROVATEUR
Your Sick rationalreaper, Nice Try, Sick-O. You Should see a Doctor for your Sickness. You're CraigsList Very Own AGENT PROVOCATEUR!!
Are You New At this Agent Provocateur thing, Because you Stink at it, and For Sake Of Arguement rationalreaper TM(LOL)( AGENT PROVOCATEUR!!) The Post I am Referring to is Posted below under ALL those PACINLAW.org Links just below.
DIVIDE AND CONQUER, VIA GREED // Indoctrination, Control, Fear, Threats
http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/Divide_and_Conquer.pdf PacIn Law
To explain: Due to the actions of these greedy gurus causes a divide and conquer result.
http://www.pacinlaw.org/fourteenth/part_0.php
A mojority of the people of the Unites States have lived all their lives under EMERGENCY RULE . . . .
http://www.pacinlaw.org/fourteenth/part_1.php
Are You Treasonist? Treason by Design.
http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/Treason_by_Design.pdf
Republic vs. Democracy
http://www.pacinlaw.org/republic/
The Origin of Sovereign Citizen
http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/Origin_Sovereign_Citizens.php
Law Of Persons
http://www.pacinlaw.org/pdf/law/Sohms_Law_of_Persons.php
Other Helpful Links
Some Questions:
http://www.pacinlaw.org/questions
Citizen Legal Fiction:
http://www.pacinlaw.org/citizen
Dual System of Law:
http://www.pacinlaw.org/dual
Historical Error:
http://www.pacinlaw.org/error
Deprogramming
http://www.deprogram.us/deprogramming/
Island Makers
http://www.islandmakers.us/demons
PAC Tour
http://www.pacinlaw.org/tour/
CraigsList and rational reaper, all AGENT PROVATEUR'S (Craigslist working for COMMUNISM)
I disagree with the rational reaper ( he works for Craiglist for COMMUNIST EXPANSION)
- Location: CraigsList and rational reaper, all AGEN
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2458988738
Seeing that I've only posted on this board (rationalreaper™)
Date: 2011-06-23, 9:47PM EDT
Reply to: see below
[Errors when replying to ads?]
about 5 or 6 times in a year and i'm getting all of this attention.I must be a threat to the Koch Bros and Dick Armeys' agenda of eliminating the middle class entirely and turning America into a Fascist Corporatist Plutocracy....which eventually will turn into flull blown communism if these people succeed.
I'm just here to counter the lies being posted by the lunatic Libertarian Teabagging Republicans.
Most of my postings are on the Washington DC Politics board...I run into the same crap over there too.
I must really be a thorn in their sides.....Just think if more Americans who love Freedom and Liberty stood up and countered these lies.....we could wipe out their influence fairly quickly.
You see.....I know that the Boston area is predominately A Liberal Progressive voter base.So for so many anti- liberal posts dominating this particular politics board....I have no doubt they are from one or two paid shills.
I'll stop in from time to time to keep you honest...and I call upon other freedom loving Americans to stand up and fight against these lying shills by posting the true facts.
RR™
Otherwise....I'll mostly be on the DC board.
PS....I believe in freedom of speech....so I don't delete legitimate,adult messages as long as it's about politics.....and as long as it's not overposted as spam.....say what you will.I'm ok with it.....just stick to the topic that the forum is about and don't flood the entire page with BS overposting....and I won't flag you
- Location: rationalreaper™
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2459078045
And my knight in shining armor rides off into the distance. Thank you RationalReaper for relieving my burden.
Now I have no excuse for not finishing my Content Audit on Historical Error.
