It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Dramey
reply to post by daddio
man i wish that would hold up in court, it would truly change my life for the better instantly if i was able to drive again without having to worry about being jailed, all over the inability to pay ridiculously high fines for traffic infringements
Ayn Rand's ATLAS SHRUGGED contains some dialogue between bureaucrat Dr. Ferris; confronting industrialist Henry Rearden about having broken a federal regulation: . . . . .
"But, after all, I did break one of your laws." (Rearden)
"Well, what do you think they're for?" (Ferris) Dr. Ferris did not notice the sudden look on Rearden's face, the look of a man hit by the first vision of that which he had sought to see. Dr. Ferris was past the stage of seeing; he was intent upon delivering the last blows to an animal caught in a trap. "Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts 'you're up against - then you'll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is in the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live, without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there In that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted--and you create a nation of lawbreakers--and then you cash in on the guilt. Now that's the system, 'Mr. Rearden, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."
In the line "...when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them; "Miss Rand unveils a vital point.
Government, you see, is in the defense/police/court business, so government's "customers" are military aggressors/criminals/civil litigants. Think about it: if there were no foreign military threat, no crime and no civil lawsuits, the government would have no "customers" and would shrink in size and authority. As Dr. Ferris acidly commented, "Who wants a nation of law abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone?" For anyone in government--nothing.
The first priority of government is to maintain a steady supply of "customers." This is easy enough to do. Remember, in the defense/police/court business, government is a monopoly. Nobody else is allowed to compete. A monopoly doesn't have to fight for a larger piece of the pie—it owns the whole pie! It has 100% market share!
The only way for a monopoly to grow bigger is to increase the size of the pie; to increase the size of the market itself. How? By creating more customers! (A baking soda manufacturer did exactly that when the decline of home baking hurt their sales. They went on a marketing offensive and pushed baking soda for alternate uses, such as cleaning, deodorizing, tooth brushing, bathing, etc.--thus increasing the size of the market itself.)
If criminals are the customers of the police and the courts, then how does government create more criminals? Create new laws which apply to new people! Laws which are all but impossible for the public to understand or obey--thus creating criminals. Or, to again quote Dr. Ferris, "But just pass the kind of laws that, can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted--and you create a nation of law breakers--and then you cash in on the guilt.
"Guilt produces passivity, and makes man programmed for defeat. The importance of this for totalitarianism cannot be overemphasized. If a whole society can be made to feel guilty, it will be unable to withstand an enslaving state: it is ripe for conquest. This has long been recognized as the most successful method of rendering men passive and pliable, incapable of resistance to statist domination and control. As guilt produces impotence, it also leads people to call for more and more controls from the state. The passive population is not only malleable, yielding, submissive; it positively welcomes state intervention. The guilty, unable to solve life's problems, will be saved by the state." -
-- David Chilton
Those who have the right to do something cannot be licensed for what they already have the right to do as such license would be meaningless. City of Chicago v Collins (19__) 51 NE 907, 910.
A license is merely a privilege to do business and is not a contract between authority granting it and grantee nor is it a property right, nor does it create a vested right. Mayo v. Market Fruit Co. of Sanford, Fla.,40 So. 2d 555, 559.
"The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right." Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941.
"Personal liberty largely consists of the Right of locomotion -- to go where and when one pleases -- only so far restrained as the Rights of others may make it necessary for the welfare of all other citizens. The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but the common Right which he has under his Right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Under this Constitutional guarantee one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another's Rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct." [emphasis added] II Am.Jur. (1st) Constitutional Law, Sect.329, p.1135.
The reason I started with the Flag issue is because it is so easy to grasp. The main problem I have with the yellow fringe is that by its use our Constitutional Republic is no more. Our system of law was changed without the public's knowledge. It was kept secret. This is fraud. The American people were allowed to believe this was just a decoration. Because the law changed from Common Law (God's Law) to Admiralty Law (the kings law) your status also changed from sovereign to subject. From being able to own property (allodial title) to not owning property (tenet on the land). If you think you own your property, stop paying taxes, it will be taken under the prize law.
"The ultimate ownership of all property is in the state; individual so-called `ownership' is only by virtue of government, i.e., law, amounting to a mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State." - Senate Document No. 43, "Contracts payable in Gold" written in 1933.
By our allowing to let these military flags fly, the American people have admitted our defeat and loss of status. Read on, you'll see what I mean. Remember the Constitution recognizes three forms of law; being governed by the Law of the Flag is Admiralty law. I will cover this in a minute; the following is a definition of the legal term Law of the Flag.
"...The agency of the master is devolved upon him by the law of the flag. The same law that confers his authority ascertains its limits, and the flag at the mast-head is notice to all the world of the extent of such power to bind the owners or freighters by his act. The foreigner who deals with this agent has notice of that law, and, if he be bound by it, there is not injustice. His notice is the national flag which is hoisted on every sea and under which the master sails into every port, and every circumstance that connects him with the vessel isolates that vessel in the eyes of the world, and demonstrates his relation to the owners and freighters as their agent for a specific purpose and with power well defined under the national maritime law." - Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1914.
So, they just destroyed your life for know reason whatsoever? Really? That has the be the most messed (another word came to mind, but I'd rather not be banned) up thing I've ever heard. Just out of curiousity how did they destroy your life?
Originally posted by andy1033
I live in uk, and a mad loon i went to school with called up these american mad people, and they have absolutely destroyed my life. i have never committed a crime, and have never ever wanted to goto america, so why are these mental people in my life.
Some mad people i went to school with in london, wanted my life destroyed, and they called up american groups like these.
These groups are just organised murderers, who will kill anyone. These people have a license to kill, and do not care if you never wanted to goto there country.
Pure scum, they have absolutely destroyed my life, for no reason, other than these groups are murderers, and the people i went to school with are murderers.
Scum world. Thats a real world scenario for all you people. Be careful who you talk to, because it may be the last person you talk to in your life.
This women who did this to me, was even paid by these looney american groups to destroy my life.
They desperately tried to frame me a few years back.
Get it people plus i have never wanted to goto america. These people use there power to murder all over the world.
By the way for your profile needs, i am a white male, with short hair, and no interest in females, so you can see how they went after my life, and how easy it was to make up stuff.
Its totally unbelievable, that they use the people who totally destroyed your life, and give them money to help try and set you up. I guess you weren't kidding when you said they were mad.
[edit on 8/20/2009 by andy1033]