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 stilltrying
Nicely put proto. It is just like the movie the matrix. People will defend it. It is exactly like an abusive relationship only the masses are abused and they will still offer all the excuses in the world for the beater. That is all they see because they cannot break free from their mental bonds and chains. The state has done an outstanding job on getting people to defend it.
Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
The State simply put does not want to own your cheap imitation knock off of a genuine article, because the state doesn't want to assume liability for it. So they let you keep the MSO isn't that nice of them.
Makes you want to get a horse!
...the word premises under the international Criminal Court Act 2002- Sect 4states: The word premises includes a place and a conveyance.
Why check with the International Criminal Court Act? Because on June 8, 2007 under Secy. Of Ag. Bruce Knight speaking at the World Pork Expo in Des Moines is quoted as saying We have to live by the same international rules were expecting other people to do. Throughout the entire Draft National Animal Identification System Users Guide land is referred to as a premises and not property.
A Premises has no protection under the Constitution of the United States while property always has the exclusive rights of the owner tied to it. Property rights are protected by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution.
The word Premise is a synonym for the word tenement. A definition of the word tenement in law is: Property such as land held by one person leasing it to another.
Websters New World Dictionary 1960 College Edition defines Premises as the part of a deed or lease that states its reason the parties involved and the property in conveyance. Webster then defines conveyance as the transfer of ownership of real property from one person to another. It is quite obvious that the bureaucrats in Washington had a very good reason to use the term premises and never mention PROPERTY. "See Derry Brownfield Interview" Wouldn't you like some clarification before signing up?
The word premises is a synonym for the word tenement. A definition of the word tenement in law is: "Property, such as land, rents, or franchises, held by one person leasing it to another.
Black's Law Dictionary, premises, in the context of estates and property, means: lands and tenaments, buildings, an estate, the subject matter of a conveyance, land and appurtenances thereto.
Registration means recording, enrolling, inserting in an official register.
Register (v.) means to record formally and exactly.
Page 22 The New User Guide-USDA The Truth about Premises Identification, Before you sign up did they release this information to you?
premises identification number, or PIN, is then assigned to that location associating it with the mailing address. Page 22 The New User Guide It is important to remember that the premises identification number (PIN) is assigned to a geophysical location. If an owner or entity sells his/her farm, the next operators of the premises use the original premises identification number that had been assigned to that location. If the seller buys a new location to build a new operation that never had livestock, he/she would register that location and obtain a new premises identification number It will carry with the land forever unless its paved over. That means this PIN must be disclosed when selling the property. Will the PIN have an negative or positive affect on the property in regards to the selling or buying of the property?
No Mis-Information, No Half Truths, No Mis-Understanding, Just Facts Taken from the USDA National Animal Identification System Draft Strategic Plan 2005-2009 Each premises will be identified with a unique seven-character identifier, or a premises identification number.
Serious questions you need to ask and demand answers to:
1: What is the legal nature of the contract that I enter into when I sign up for a U.S. Premises Identification Number?
2: Does the U.S. Premises Identification Number, "cloud" the title to my property?
3: When I get a U.S. Premises Identification Number, does my farm become subject to the regulations of the U.S. Department of Agriculture?
...the primary reason the USDA-APHIS desires to force the NAIS system onto the livestock sectors of the United States is simple: Bruce Knight told a large group of bovine practitioners at our annual meeting in Vancouver, Canada in September 2007, when asked why the USDA was pushing so hard for NAIS, and I quote, "It is quite simple. We want to be in compliance with OIE regulations by 2010."...
...The USDA-APHIS has testified before the United States Department of Agriculture, House of Representatives, Committee on Agriculture, Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy, Poultry, March 11, 2009 that the NAIS would have to be electronic in nature to function as envisioned by the WTO.
Now I don't know about all you equine owners, but we cattle producers do not look kindly on an international agency in Belgium telling us what we can and cannot do with our livestock in the United States.
It will cost the equine owner in excess of $50.00 a head to implant the electronic microchip desired by the USDA and the WTO. You will then be required to report any movement of your horse or horses off your property, and for any reason. Imagine the bureaucratic nightmare and the paperwork requirements of reporting to your government every time you go on a trail ride, every time you go to a show or an event, and every time you trailer a mare to go to the stud. There will have to be an NAIS office in every county seat to process all this data, keep track of your information, and report any violations to the USDA. Just imagine the fines and enforcement actions that will be carried out to enforce this NAIS system on the livestock industry of the United States of America, including equine owners.
...The United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA-APHIS) no longer seeks to carry out their mandate to prevent the introduction of foreign animal and plant diseases into the United States.
R. M. Thornsberry, D.V.M., M.B.A. March 28, 2009
Originally posted by PauligirlThe MCO or MSO is the manufacturer's papers. Shows when and where the vehicle was built and if tariffs involved if imported. When you buy the car/truck/trailer, the MSO is turned in and you get a title in your name.
Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Where does your money come from? The Federal Reserve. What is the Federal Reserve? A foreign owned not for profit religious corporation!
The heck you say. I kid you not, registered in the State of Deleware famous for it's lax corporate laws that help sheild corporate ownership and registered as a religious not for profit corporation.
Maybe that's why your currency attached to nothing of value is emblazoned with "In God we Trust".
The reality is the U.S. Dollar is a worthless piece of paper no different than monopoly money.
It's part of a religious ceremony and can be used for goods and services at the Corporate Company Store.
[edit on 25/10/09 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]
U.C.C. - ARTICLE 9 - SECURED TRANSACTIONS; SALES OF ACCOUNTS AND
PART 1. SHORT TITLE, APPLICABILITY AND DEFINITIONS
§ 9-109. Classification of Goods: "Consumer Goods"; "Equipment"; "Farm Products";
(1) "consumer goods" if they are used or bought for use primarily for personal, family or
(2) "equipment" if they are used or bought for use primarily in business (including farming or a
profession) or by a debtor who is a non-profit organization or a governmental subdivision or
agency or if the goods are not included in the definitions of inventory, farm products or
Relevant applicable stare decisis case cites relating directly to UCC 9-109:
“Under UCC §9-109 there is a real distinction between goods purchased for personal use
and those purchased for business use. The two are mutually exclusive and the principal
use to which the property is put should be considered as determinative.” James Talcott,
Inc. v Gee, 5 UCC Rep Serv 1028; 266 Cal.App.2d 384, 72 Cal.Rptr. 168 (1968).
“The classification of goods in UCC §9-109 are mutually exclusive.” McFadden v
Mercantile-Safe Deposit & Trust Co., 8 UCC Rep Serv 766; 260 Md 601, 273 A.2d 198
“Automobile purchased for the purpose of transporting buyer to and from his place of
employment was ``consumer goods'' as defined in UCC §9-109.” Mallicoat v Volunteer
Finance & Loan Corp., 3 UCC Rep Serv 1035; 415 S.W.2d 347 (Tenn. App., 1966).
“The provisions of UCC §2-316 of the Maryland UCC do not apply to sales of consumer
goods (a term which includes automobiles, whether new or used, that are bought
primarily for personal, family, or household use).” Maryland Independent Automobile
Dealers Assoc., Inc. v Administrator, Motor Vehicle Admin., 25 UCC Rep Serv 699; 394
A.2d 820, 41 Md App 7 (1978).
IN RE BARNES
United States District Court,
D Maine, September 15, 1972
Bankruptcy No. BK 72-129ND, No. EK 72-13OND
 Consumer goods - automobile for transportation to and from work.
The use of a vehicle by its owner for purposes of traveling to and from his employment is a
personal, as opposed to a business use, as that term is used in UCC § 9-109(l), and the
vehicle will be classified as consumer goods rather than equipment.
The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose, since its unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment... In legal contemplation, it is as inoperative as if it had never been passed... Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no right, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection and justifies no acts performed under it... A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing law. Indeed insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it." Bonnett v. Vallier, 116 N.W. 885, 136 Wis. 193 (1908); NORTON v. SHELBY COUNTY, 118 U.S. 425 (1886) (emphasis mine)