It's hard staying motivated when nothing drives me. LB Bork's forums are far too slow for me, and RJ disappeared off of Craigslist for a good chunk of winter. Because of this, I literally ran out of things that I could talk about easily, things I only have time for anymore.
Lately I have noticed an increase in racist posts in the bos /pol section. I responded to one of the posts in a sarcastic manner but it was completely lost on the original poster. Likewise, I have also seen a rise in "judicial male bias" type posts, which seems like something that RJ would post.
Here's a common judicial male bias post that I attribute to RJ, mainly because this is the first result for
false restraining orders and it fits his profile.
males over 13 years old (USA)
Date: 2012-03-26, 8:17AM EDT
Reply to:
xc5kf-2915702327@comm.craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
Every man and boy be afraid be very afraid. Learn how our system will
destroy your life and you will have no way to protect yourself.
For more info google "False restraining orders" before its too late.
Educate yourself!!
- Location: USA
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2915702327
There were quite a few of these. The old me would have went out of my way to flag these posts. Now, I just roll my eyes and move on. I just don't have the energy to flag this.
Then this post popped up. This is the first time I have seen an anti-14th Amendment post since the new year. With that in mind, I don't ever remember seeing it. Man, it's great having a fresh set of eyes!
U.S.A. The Republic, Is The House That No One Lives In (Except the Few!!)
Date: 2012-03-30, 9:22AM EDT
Reply to:
xspxx-2930460435@comm.craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
U.S.A. The Republic, Is The House That No One Lives In
"On July 27, 1868, one day before the 14th Amendment took effect, an
"Act" of Congress was passed. This Act was 15 United States Statute at
Large, known as the "Expatriation Statute." Though this Statute is no
longer included in the United... States Code, it has not been repealed
and is still in effect. This Statute is extremely important because it
is the public municipal law the individual can use for private purposes
to remove him/herself from the private trust law operating in the public
sector. That is, a private individual, who has found himself or herself
bound by private law that is being used in the public sector to promote
public policy of compelled performance which he did not have a choice
in, can access the public positive statute law to move back under the
liberty and protection of the Republic and its separation of powers.
The preamble of 15 United States Statute at Large is unique in that
Congress laid the legal discussions to rest before the Statute took
effect to assure it would not be tampered with legally in any way. It
stands as written and is there for the citizens to use as Public Law for
the private purpose of moving themselves from one political or
territorial jurisdiction to another. This means there is a way out at
anytime of any United States government policy or law, including those
of its political subdivisions, that is based on private law. Whenever
you find yourself bound by any compelled performance you had no choice
in, you are operating in the jurisdiction of the United States
government and its political subdivisions where there is no republican
form of government and its separation of powers. By applying Public Laws
for your private benefit, you can break that dictatorial jurisdiction
anytime you choose.
The insidiousness of the 14th Amendment is that even though it is
private contract law of a trust, it is not a bilateral contract where
both parties sign the document after a meeting of the minds. The 14th
Amendment is "quasi contractual." That is, it is not a true contract as
recognized in the general common law, rather it is called an "adhesion"
or "unilateral" contract where only one party binds himself. In this
case, a person agrees to the private trust law merely by his silence. If
a person does not speak up to let his choice be known, the trust will
assume he or she is a part of and beneficiary of it. They will assume
that you have gifted your life to the trust for the benefits they have
to offer.
Under the 14th Amendment, the citizen [who does not make his choice
known for or against the trust relationship], is assumed to be a
beneficiary because he or she has not stated otherwise. As a
beneficiary, you are an outlaw as far as the Constitution is concerned.
You are operating outside of the Constitution. While operating outside
the Constitution you only have relative rights under the Bill of Rights
and the Constitution because private contract law takes priority over
constitutional law.
http://freedom-school.com/history/usa.html#expatriation
- Location: Except the Few!!
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2930460435
Googling
Expatriation Statute brought me to a carbon copy on Daily Paul, posted in 2009. TxRedneck is the PAC operative defending the post, and judging from his post history, seems to have a strange sense of history. (though I have to admit, I did enjoy doing the detective work in verifying some of his claims).
If you click on the freedom-school link, it will take you to the original text written by Lee Brobst, and features two citations in the first paragraph, and no citations anywhere else in this section.
55. 15 United States Statutes at Large, Ch. 249-250, pps 223-224,
Section 1, R.S. 1999, 8 USC 1481.
56. Briehl v. Dulles, 248 F2d 561, 583 at footnote 21, (1957).
Here's
8 USC 1481 and
Briehl v. Dulles (1957) - or better yet,
Kent v. Dulles (1958) (I'm wondering if Lee Brobst is whitewashing the references to Communism in the case, because god forbid a Communist does something even remotely good...). Neither of which support Brobst's claims. Those two were probably cited to provide the illusion of authority. But I'll play along.
I took a look a footnote 21 (from Briehl v. Dulles), which says:
This act, though no longer included in the United States Code, has
not been repealed and is still in effect. Savorgnan v. United States,
1950, 338 U.S. 491, 498-499, 70 S.Ct. 292
From the text (bolding mine):
Almost a century ago, Congress declared that 'the right of expatriation
is a natural and inherent right of all people, indispensable to the
enjoyment of the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,'
and decreed that 'any declaration, instruction, opinion, order, or
decision of any officers of this government which denies, restricts,
impairs, or questions the right of expatriation, is hereby declared
inconsistent with the fundamental principles of this government.' 15
Stat. 223-224 (1868), R.S. 1999, 8 U.S.C. 800 (1940).
Although designed to apply especially to the rights of immigrants to
shed their foreign nationalities, that Act of Congress 'is also broad
enough to cover, and does cover, the corresponding natural and inherent
right of American citizens to expatriate themselves.' Savorgnan v.
United States, 1950, 338 U.S. 491, 498 note 11, 70 S.Ct. 292, 296, 94
L.Ed. 287.
The Supreme Court has held that the Citizenship Act of 1907 and the
Nationality Act of 1940 'are to be read in the light of the declaration
of policy favoring freedom of expatriation which stands unrepealed.'
Id., 338 U.S. at pages 498-499, 70 S.Ct. at page 296. That same light, I
think, illuminates 22 U.S.C.A. 211a and 8 U.S.C.A. 1185. Since
expatriation is today impossible without leaving the country,
the policy expressed by Congress in 1868 and never repealed precludes a
reading of the passport and travel control statutes which would permit
the Secretary of State to prevent citizens from leaving.
Footnote 23:
8 U.S.C.A. 1481 and 1483; Savorgnan v. United States, 338 U.S. at page 503, 70 S.Ct. at page 298
Also, here's
Savorgnan v. United States (1950). Basically, one can lose their US citizenship by getting citizenship from another country, and going to that country to live there (in their abode).
So there you have it, I defeated Lee Brobst with his own citations. If you wanna expatriate, you gotta leave the United States. So called Republics of Makebelieve do not count.
Bonus: Racism in /pol! Guess which ones are RJ's (he isn't the only ultra conservative troll on /pol).
Al Sharpton Proves There's Such A Thing As A Nigger (Black Race Baiter)
Date: 2012-03-31, 2:06AM EDT
Reply to:
72zhd-2932069183@comm.craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
You know he is.........
- Location: Black Race Baiter
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2932069183
Al Sharpton: A Product of Liberalism ( Race Baiters !)
Date: 2012-03-31, 2:11AM EDT
Reply to:
g4pft-2932071727@comm.craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
Admit it Libs.........Al Sharpton is a opportunist, and you love him.
- Location: Race Baiters !
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2932071727
LIBS Created The Black Fatherless Gangtas With Welfare (Young Hoodie Gangstas With No Dads)
Date: 2012-03-31, 2:18AM EDT
Reply to:
xzpkj-2932075399@comm.craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
No Dads = Instant Welfare for the moms
You LIBS destroyed the young black males, cause your system of welfare rewards single black mothers with children
Now they look to rappers to guide them, instead of Dads.
- Location: Young Hoodie Gangstas With No Dads
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2932075399
Yes, We Know There Are White Niggers As Well (White Trash Destroyed By Fatherlessness)
Date: 2012-03-31, 2:22AM EDT
Reply to:
grm68-2932077761@comm.craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
Yes, your LIB courts destroy white families as well by promoting a Fatherless world in Divorce Courts (Probate Courts)
Then you LIBS have the audacity to call the courts "Family Court".
You freaks are responsible for destroying young blacks (mostly) and white boys as well.
- Location: White Trash Destroyed By Fatherlessness
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2932077761
Poor Stupid Black Gangstas Going To Die Cause of Sharpton/Jackson (Race Baiters War)
Date: 2012-03-31, 2:49AM EDT
Reply to:
cdghj-2932090904@comm.craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
I feel bad for all the Fatherless Black Rapper Gangtas.
Sharpton and Jackson are going to get them killed after the Leftist Black Race Baiters start a race war.
- Location: Race Baiters War
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2932090904
Incestual racist dipshits invade craigslist (bitchvill usa)
Date: 2012-03-31, 4:57AM EDT
Reply to:
nprbd-2932136641@comm.craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
faggot alert!
- Location: bitchvill usa
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2932136641
Republicans racist idiots r gonna get their asses handed to them this (election)
Date: 2012-03-31, 5:00AM EDT
Reply to:
g8xz8-2932137526@comm.craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
clowns, no one cares about your fuckin hick bullshit, fucking retards.
- Location: election
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2932137526
pusssyyy ass racists (boston)
Date: 2012-03-31, 5:03AM EDT
Reply to:
mfggr-2932138388@comm.craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
hide behind their keyboards. blow clanmaster wizard in the chicken roost ya little bitch
- Location: boston
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 2932138388
And that wraps up my return. See you next season!
