Alex Jones was on 'The View' today ..........  defending Charlie Sheen.  Do yaw'll remember back a while ago that Charlie was supposed to be in "Loose Change" 2.  I wonder if Alex Jones is the reason Charlie seems to be in dire straights now?  hmmmmmm 

I sat for almost a half hour waiting for 'The View' to load and then when it seemed like it was finally getting there, the Friday show was the one on the screen. 

Do you remember back in the day that when the 'Loose Change' boys were supposed to be on 'The View' that it was pre-empted?  hmmmmm, was that before Alex Jones invited Jason Burmas to work for him?  (I met the boys way back when at a book store in Phoenix and there were 3 of them.  I talked privately to one and I'll be damned if I remember if it was Dylan Avery or the other.)  I'm not gonna go look now as my system is not stable and I'm not even sure about Burmas first name but if you guys want, do what you do, k?

I'm gonna go now and try to send this in email.    Oh yeah, BTW, I went into my yahoo email yesterday and there was somebody editing my send emails and erasing many of them.  ...cal

http://theview.abc.go.com/videos/The_View_in_%3A60

http://phblog.wordpress.com/2010/08/23/who-owns-which-organic-company-surprise/
Excerpt:

Who owns which “organic” company, surprise!

Posted on 08/23/2010 by Maraline

Did you know M&Ms owns Seeds of Change, or that General Mills owns Cascadian Farms, Heinz owns 19.5% of Hain Celestial who owns organic company’s including Earth’s Best, Arrowhead Mills, Spectrum. Kraft owns Boca and Back to Nature, and Kellogg’s owns Morning Star, Kashi (yes Kashi), and Bear Naked!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hain_Celestial_Group
Excerpt:
The Hain Celestial Group is a food company whose main focus is natural and organic foods and personal care products. Their products range from herbal teas, offered through their Celestial Seasonings brand to organic free range chickens from the FreeBird brand.^[1][2] They also provide organic, whole grain foods through Arrowhead Mills, founded in 1960 by Frank Ford of Hereford, the seat of Deaf Smith County, west of Amarillo, Texas. The H. J. Heinz Company has owned 19.5% of the company since 1999.^[3] The company assumed its current form in May 2000 through the merger of the Hain Food Group with Celestial Seasonings, Inc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teresa_Heinz
Teresa Heinz wikipedia
Except:
Wealth
Heinz is the life estate beneficiary or outright beneficiary of her husband's trusts, making her either extremely wealthy in her own name or powerful as a trustee of Heinz family wealth.^{[citation needed]} Kerry is wealthy in his own right, though not to the same degree, since he became a trust fund beneficiary of his mother's and Forbes family trusts. Kerry and Heinz signed a prenuptial agreement and have kept their premarital assets separate.
Heinz has declined to disclose her personal tax returns, citing family trusts and privacy. She is estimated to be worth between $750 million and $1.2 billion. According to her most recently released income tax of 2003, the Kerry and Heinz paid an effective federal income tax rate of 12%.
Heinz and Kerry live an affluent life. They own a six-floor, $7 million townhome in Boston's Beacon Hill neighborhood, a $9 million ocean-front home on Nantucket, a $5 million ski retreat in Idaho, a $4 million estate in Fox Chapel, Pennsylvania near the Heinz family's home base of Pittsburgh, and a $5 million home in Washington, D.C.'s Georgetown neighborhood.^[citation

http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/2010/07/27/sen-john-kerry-his-yacht-gate-scandal-hypocritical-dem-senator-skirts-paying-taxes-on-his-7-million-yacht-video/
Excerpt:
From Boston Herald, Sen. John Kerry skips town on sails tax:

Sen. John Kerry, who has repeatedly voted to raise taxes while in Congress, dodged a whopping six-figure state tax bill on his new multimillion-dollar yacht by mooring her in Newport, R.I.
Isabel – Kerry’s luxe, 76-foot New Zealand-built Friendship sloop with an Edwardian-style, glossy varnished teak interior, two VIP main cabins and a pilothouse fitted with a wet bar and cold wine storage – was designed by Rhode Island boat designer Ted Fontaine.
But instead of berthing the vessel in Nantucket, where the senator summers with the missus, Teresa Heinz, Isabel’s hailing port is listed as “Newport” on her stern.
Could the reason be that the Ocean State repealed its Boat Sales and Use Tax back in 1993, making the tiny state to the south a haven – like the Cayman Islands, Bermuda and Nassau – for tax-skirting luxury yacht owners?
Cash-strapped Massachusetts still collects a 6.25 percent sales tax and an annual excise tax on yachts. Sources say Isabel sold for something in the neighborhood of $7 million, meaning Kerry saved approximately $437,500 in sales tax and an annual excise tax of about $70,000.

Russia threatens nuclear attack on Poland over US missile shield deal.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/2566005/Russia-threatens-nuclear-attack-on-Poland-over-US-missile-shield-deal.html
Excerpt:

Allies React to U.S. Missile U-Turn

By MARC CHAMPION and PETER SPIEGEL

(See Corrections & Amplifications item below)

Defense Department

An Aegis cruiser fires an SM-3 missile. The U.S. plans to use the SM-3 missile as a major feature of its missile-defense system in Europe.

President Barack Obama's decision to drop plans to deploy a ballistic-missile defense shield in Central Europe -- drawing immediate cheers in Moscow and criticism elsewhere -- is a gamble by the U.S. that scaling back its defense ambitions will improve security in the long run.

View Full Image

Reuters

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, at briefing at the Pentagon Thursday, said the U.S. would initially deploy Aegis ships with missile interceptors to help defend European allies under a revamped missile-shield program.

The U.S. explained the reversal by saying it would lead to a more effective defense because the system that had been planned was designed for the wrong threat, long-range missiles from Iran. Current intelligence suggests shorter-range missiles are more likely to be developed sooner, and they can be better combated by a simpler system, U.S. officials said.
The decision was attacked by Republicans in Congress and Bush-era defense officials, who questioned the new intelligence estimates and accused the administration of putting its relations with the Kremlin ahead of the security of NATO allies in Europe.
The U.S. about-face was a major diplomatic coup for Moscow, which has fiercely opposed the previous plan to put a battery of 10 ballistic missile interceptors in Poland and a radar in the Czech Republic.

View Slideshow

Czarek Sokolowski/Associated Press

A Polish woman protested against a request by the U.S. to place a missile defense base in Warsaw, Poland, in March 2007.

Moscow said its own nuclear arsenal was the target, rather than any threat from Iran as the former Bush administration said. In November, Russian President Dimitry Medvedev threatened to station tactical missiles on Poland's border if the U.S. system were deployed. Mr. Medvedev on Thursday gave no indication that Russia would respond to the U.S. shift with greater cooperation, for example in pressuring Iran over its nuclear-fuel program. Other Russian officials said explicitly Thursday that wouldn't happen.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125317801774419047.html

Offshore saves wealth Holding companies video
http://www.incorporation-offshore-saves-wealth.com/holding-companies.html

http://www.zealllc.com/2005/geosilver.htm
Excerpt:

The Rest of the World:  Isn’t it odd seeing Poland as the world’s fifth leading silver producer?  Poland is not typically a country that comes to the forefront of people’s minds when they think silver.  Poland happens to be a primary copper producer, in fact the top producer in Europe, and with all that copper it pulls out an abundant amount of silver.  Its largest miner, KGHM, claims that between its three primary mines there lies some of the largest silver reserves on the planet.

Polish presidents death plane crash conspiracy
http://www.survivalmonkey.com/forum/tin-foil-hat-lounge/27387-polish-presidents-death-plane-crash-conspiracy.html


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth
Excerpt:

World Distribution of Wealth and Population in the Year 2000

The distribution of wealth is a comparison of the wealth of various members or groups in a society. It differs from the distribution of income in that it looks at the distribution of ownership of the assets in a society, rather than the current income of members of that society.

http://www.presstv.ir/usdetail/164793.html
Excerpt:

America's staggering inequality and our strong preference for a Swedish alternative

Fri Feb 11, 2011 7:17PM

Jonathan Weiler, the Independent Weekly of North Carolina

Share | Email | Print

Most Americans realize that the United States has become more unequal over the past three decades or so. But it's unlikely that most Americans have a full grasp of the sheer magnitude of the change in the distribution of wealth since the end of the 1970s, or its impact on the lives of ordinary Americans.

Many data point to what the political scientists Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson, in their important new book, Winner Take-All Politics, call "trickle up" economics. For example, according to the Congressional Budget Office, via Lane Kenworthy, the lowest twenty percent of households in America saw their post-tax wages increase from $15,500 in 1979 to $17,500 in 2007 (in constant, inflation- adjusted dollars). The middle sixty percent saw their incomes increase from $44,000 to $57,000 during that period. And the top one percent saw their post-tax incomes explode from $350,000 to $1.3 million, a near quadrupling. The increases for the top one-tenth of one percent and top-hundredth of one percent were greater still.

Of course, many think inequality is irrelevant, as long as a rising tide lifts all boats. But while the wealthiest Americans live ever more opulent lifestyles, ordinary Americans, especially at the sixtieth percentile and below are running in place, if not falling further behind. For one thing, the typical household puts in longer work hours now than was true in 1979, placing added strains on many American families. Furthermore, in the past three years the general picture of distribution has likely worsened, with record levels of long-term unemployment as well as draconian cuts to basic services like health care and education at the state and local level, which have disproportionately affected people lower down the income ladder. So, the relatively weak gains for the majority of Americans in the past thirty years have been precarious, subject to a swift and un-nerving reversal of fortune, while those at the top continue to enjoy record incomes and wealth.

And the growing concentration of wealth at the top is arguably directly related to that growing precariousness for most of the rest of us. Had the pattern of wealth distribution that existed in the 1970s held steady over the subsequent decades, Hacker and Pierson estimate that the lowest sixty percent of households would have enjoyed incomes between $6,000 and $12,000 higher in 2006 than they actually were. That'd be a nice cushion to have in the face of an economic downturn.

http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/indtaxstats/article/0,,id=96426,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2006/dec/06/business.internationalnews

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth

http://www.presstv.ir/usdetail/164793.html
Excerpt:

America's staggering inequality and our strong preference for a Swedish alternative

Fri Feb 11, 2011 7:17PM

Jonathan Weiler, the Independent Weekly of North Carolina

Share | Email | Print

Most Americans realize that the United States has become more unequal over the past three decades or so. But it's unlikely that most Americans have a full grasp of the sheer magnitude of the change in the distribution of wealth since the end of the 1970s, or its impact on the lives of ordinary Americans.

Many data point to what the political scientists Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson, in their important new book, Winner Take-All Politics, call "trickle up" economics. For example, according to the Congressional Budget Office, via Lane Kenworthy, the lowest twenty percent of households in America saw their post-tax wages increase from $15,500 in 1979 to $17,500 in 2007 (in constant, inflation- adjusted dollars). The middle sixty percent saw their incomes increase from $44,000 to $57,000 during that period. And the top one percent saw their post-tax incomes explode from $350,000 to $1.3 million, a near quadrupling. The increases for the top one-tenth of one percent and top-hundredth of one percent were greater still.

Of course, many think inequality is irrelevant, as long as a rising tide lifts all boats. But while the wealthiest Americans live ever more opulent lifestyles, ordinary Americans, especially at the sixtieth percentile and below are running in place, if not falling further behind. For one thing, the typical household puts in longer work hours now than was true in 1979, placing added strains on many American families. Furthermore, in the past three years the general picture of distribution has likely worsened, with record levels of long-term unemployment as well as draconian cuts to basic services like health care and education at the state and local level, which have disproportionately affected people lower down the income ladder. So, the relatively weak gains for the majority of Americans in the past thirty years have been precarious, subject to a swift and un-nerving reversal of fortune, while those at the top continue to enjoy record incomes and wealth.

And the growing concentration of wealth at the top is arguably directly related to that growing precariousness for most of the rest of us. Had the pattern of wealth distribution that existed in the 1970s held steady over the subsequent decades, Hacker and Pierson estimate that the lowest sixty percent of households would have enjoyed incomes between $6,000 and $12,000 higher in 2006 than they actually were. That'd be a nice cushion to have in the face of an economic downturn.

http://www.presstv.ir/usdetail/164793.html
Excerpt:

America's staggering inequality and our strong preference for a Swedish alternative

Fri Feb 11, 2011 7:17PM

Jonathan Weiler, the Independent Weekly of North Carolina

Share | Email | Print

Most Americans realize that the United States has become more unequal over the past three decades or so. But it's unlikely that most Americans have a full grasp of the sheer magnitude of the change in the distribution of wealth since the end of the 1970s, or its impact on the lives of ordinary Americans.

Many data point to what the political scientists Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson, in their important new book, Winner Take-All Politics, call "trickle up" economics. For example, according to the Congressional Budget Office, via Lane Kenworthy, the lowest twenty percent of households in America saw their post-tax wages increase from $15,500 in 1979 to $17,500 in 2007 (in constant, inflation- adjusted dollars). The middle sixty percent saw their incomes increase from $44,000 to $57,000 during that period. And the top one percent saw their post-tax incomes explode from $350,000 to $1.3 million, a near quadrupling. The increases for the top one-tenth of one percent and top-hundredth of one percent were greater still.

Of course, many think inequality is irrelevant, as long as a rising tide lifts all boats. But while the wealthiest Americans live ever more opulent lifestyles, ordinary Americans, especially at the sixtieth percentile and below are running in place, if not falling further behind. For one thing, the typical household puts in longer work hours now than was true in 1979, placing added strains on many American families. Furthermore, in the past three years the general picture of distribution has likely worsened, with record levels of long-term unemployment as well as draconian cuts to basic services like health care and education at the state and local level, which have disproportionately affected people lower down the income ladder. So, the relatively weak gains for the majority of Americans in the past thirty years have been precarious, subject to a swift and un-nerving reversal of fortune, while those at the top continue to enjoy record incomes and wealth.

And the growing concentration of wealth at the top is arguably directly related to that growing precariousness for most of the rest of us. Had the pattern of wealth distribution that existed in the 1970s held steady over the subsequent decades, Hacker and Pierson estimate that the lowest sixty percent of households would have enjoyed incomes between $6,000 and $12,000 higher in 2006 than they actually were. That'd be a nice cushion to have in the face of an economic downturn.

http://www.presstv.ir/usdetail/164793.html

http://www.truth-out.org/tapping-our-resources-declining-returns-fossil-fuel-leases67197

Tapping "Our" Resources: Declining Returns on Fossil Fuel Leases

Friday 04 February 2011

by: Christine Shearer, t r u t h o u t | News Analysis

A drilling rig at night. (Photo: Lars Christopher Nøttaasen / Flickr)

Right now, the government is looking to offer up federal lands to mine up to 5.8 billion tons of coal, while groups like the American Petroleum Institute are pushing to open the eastern Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean to offshore oil exploration. Proponents say we need to begin leasing these federal lands for mining and drilling immediately to collect revenues for the US Treasury and help secure US energy independence. Seems like a strong argument, but how true is it?

In June 2009, sociologists Bob Gramling and William Freudenburg reported that, since Ronald Reagan's Interior Secretary James Watt moved to area-wide offshore oil and gas leasing in 1983, the US government (that is, all of us) has received steadily declining returns. The federal government leases offshore lands for oil and gas drilling, collecting revenue from both the leases and from royalties. Before Watt's change, the US Geological Survey would conduct resource assessments of the offshore area and a limited number of blocks would be offered up in a competitive bid, often with fixed royalty rates.

After Watt moved to area-wide leasing, however, much larger tracts of land were made available for leasing - so large that soon only huge, transnational oil corporations could conduct the seismic surveys of the areas. This inherent disparity gives those companies insider knowledge - even more knowledge than the federal government itself - when it is time for bidding. After comparing the per-acre leasing data on offshore oil bids before and after the change, Gramling and Freudenburg found that "before area-wide leasing in 1983, 3,520 leases were sold at the $2,224 average rate, while 21,179 were sold from 1983 to 2008 at the $263 rate." In short, the acres leased took off while the money collected sank, without even accounting for inflation. Royalties also decreased, and the US Congress further lowered royalties in 1995 with the Outer Continental Shelf Deep Water Royalty Relief Act, exempting some of the more tenuous offshore operations from paying royalties altogether.

As the Government Accountability Office noted in 2007, total revenues collected by the US federal government for the nation's offshore oil resources is one of the lowest government takes in the world - out of 104 jurisdictions surveyed, only 11 received a smaller portion of oil revenue than the US government.

Interestingly, a similar pattern can be found in the coal industry. The Powder River Basin (PRB) is a region in southeast Montana and northeast Wyoming known for its coal deposits. The region annually produces over 400 million short tons of coal - about 40 percent of the coal produced in the US.

Yet in 1990, the federal government decertified the region as a coal-producing area. The decertification means that rather than requiring the federal government to follow formal leasing procedures, including consideration of environmental and economic impacts and competitive bidding, a looser, "lease by application" process is used. The effect of this process is much like area-wide offshore oil and gas leasing: large coal companies are increasingly designing the lease boundaries in the region where the federal government once did. This pattern gives the companies insider knowledge and the ability to carve out tracts favorable to expanding their existing coal mines, undermining competitive bidding. A 2009 WildEarth Guardians report, "Undermining the Climate," found that in the last 20 years, only three lease sales out of the total 21 in the region had more than one bidder.

Do you like this? Click here to get Truthout stories sent to your inbox every day - free.

The report also found that, as would be expected, the areas with only one bidder were leased at much lower values than those with more than one bidder. The decertification also thwarts the federal government from doing a regional analysis of global warming impacts in the region from mining, and makes coal seem artificially cheap when compared to cleaner energy sources.

Well, it's okay that these companies pay us less for the leases because the extracted energy is for our use, right? Not necessarily. Fossil fuel companies do not have to sell the oil and coal taken within the US back to the US; they are free to sell the resource as they see fit. Oil is sent to and sold on an international market. A ban on exporting national Alaska oil was overturned in 1995. Meanwhile, coal mined in the US is increasingly being exported: in the first six months of 2010, US coal exports to Asia grew nearly 400 percent compared to exports for all of 2009. Coal companies are looking for more ways to ship coal from the PRB, including one that spurred the recent controversy over a new coal export terminal in Washington that would ship five million tons of coal to Asia annually.

In short, fossil fuel companies are getting the right to dig up fossil fuels on federal lands for ever-lower prices, while remaining free to export the resource as they see fit, even to nations they claim should clamp down on greenhouse gas emissions before the US agrees to do so. Large companies like BP and Exxon have been found posting profits overseas to further lower the financial duties owed here, and still, many oil and coal companies want to pass off responsibility for the multiple environmental and health effects associated with mining and drilling to the public, the costs of which become yet another taxpayer subsidy.

So, when proponents of coal mining and oil drilling on federal land say we should tap "our" natural resources for our benefit, whose benefit are they really referring to? Our benefit might better be served through conservation, energy efficiency and investment in new sources of technology and energy.

HAARP and New Zealand Earthquake video
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1370481/pg1

Is New Zealand Earthquake linked to teh mysterious deaths of more than 100 pilot whales?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/02/22/is-new-zealand-earthquake-linked-to-the-mysterious-deaths-of-more-than-100-pilot-whales-115875-22941618/
Excerpt:
Is New Zealand earthquake linked to the mysterious deaths of more than 100 pilot whales?
  By Chris Powers 22/02/2011
Twitter was awash today with theories that the bizarre deaths of more than 100 stranded pilot whales in New Zealand may have been a warning that an earthquake was going to hit.
There have been TWO mass whale deaths on NZ’s South Island in less than three weeks.
In the latest bizarre incident on Sunday, less than 48 hours before the earthquake hit, a pod of whales beached themselves near Cavalier Creek on Stewart Island.
Discussing the earthquake and whale deaths on Twitter, Kate Redman 'DolphinSeeker30' asked: “could the stranding of 100 pilot whales be linked to the earthquake?”
CodeNameTanya tweeted: “Over a hundred pilot whales beached themselves in New Zealand and then the earthquake. Wonder if tectonic plate shifts confuse whales. Hmmm.”
VeganWheekers asked: “Could there be a connection between the 107 whales that died on New Zealand beach yesterday and today's earthquake?” while TV New Zealand added: "has anyone noticed the correlation between beached whales and earthquakes?"
Following the discovery of 30 stranded pilot whales on the island earlier this month, RadioLive breakfast show host Marcus Lush tweeted that an earthquake “greater than five” would hit in the next week.
Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/02/22/is-new-zealand-earthquake-linked-to-the-mysterious-deaths-of-more-than-100-pilot-whales-115875-22941618/#ixzz1F1Lr8IUK
Go Camping for 95p! Vouchers collectable in the Daily and Sunday Mirror until 11th August . Click here for more information

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beached_whale
Excerpt:
SONAR

See also: Noise pollution#Environment and Marine Mammals and Sonar

Volunteers attempt to keep body temperatures of beached whales from rising at Farewell Spit, New Zealand.

There is evidence that active sonar leads to beaching. On some occasions whales have stranded shortly after military sonar was active in the area,^[8] suggesting a link. Theories describing how sonar may cause whale deaths have also been advanced after necropsies found internal injuries in stranded whales. In contrast, whales stranded due to seemingly natural causes are usually healthy prior to beaching:

The low frequency active sonar (LFA sonar) used by the military to detect submarines is the loudest sound ever put into the seas. Yet the U.S. Navy is planning to deploy LFA sonar across 80 percent of the world ocean. At an amplitude of two hundred forty decibels, it is loud enough to kill whales and dolphins and already causing mass strandings and deaths in areas where U.S. and/or NATO forces are conducting exercises.

—Julia Whitty, The Fragile Edge^[9]

The large and rapid pressure changes made by loud sonar can cause hemorrhaging. Evidence emerged after 17 beaked whales hauled out in the Bahamas in March 2000 following a United States Navy sonar exercise. The Navy accepted blame^[10] agreeing that the dead whales experienced acoustically-induced hemorrhages around the ears. The resulting disorientation probably led to the stranding. Ken Balcomb, a whale zoologist, specializes in the Killer Whale populations that inhabit the Strait of Juan de Fuca between Washington and Vancouver Island.^[11] He investigated these beachings and argues that the powerful sonar pulses resonated with airspaces in the whales, tearing tissue around the ears and brain.^[12] Apparently not all species are affected by SONAR.^[13]
Another means by which sonar could be hurting whales is a form of decompression sickness. This was first raised by necrological examinations of 14 beaked whales stranded in the Canary Islands. The stranding happened on 24 September 2002, close to the operating area of Neo Tapon (an international naval exercise) about four hours after the activation of mid-frequency sonar.^[14] The team of scientists found acute tissue damage from gas-bubble lesions, which are indicative of decompression sickness.^[14] The precise mechanism of how sonar causes bubble formation is not known. It could be due to whales panicking and surfacing too rapidly in an attempt to escape the sonar pulses. There is also a theoretical basis by which sonar vibrations can cause supersaturated gas to nucleate to form bubbles.^[15]
The overwhelming majority of the whales involved in SONAR-associated beachings are Cuvier's Beaked Whales (Ziphius cavirostrus). This species strands frequently, but mass strandings are rare. They are so difficult to study in the wild that prior to the interest raised by the SONAR controversy, most of the information about them came from stranded animals. The first to publish research linking beachings with naval activity were Simmonds and Lopez-Jurado in 1991. They noted that over the past decade there had been a number of mass strandings of beaked whales in the Canary Islands, and each time the Spanish Navy was conducting exercises. Conversely, there were no mass strandings at other times. They did not propose a theory for the strandings.
In May 1996 there was another mass stranding in West Peloponnese, Greece. At the time it was noted as "atypical" both because mass strandings of beaked whales are rare, and also because the stranded whales were spread over such a long stretch of coast with each individual whale spacially separated from the next stranding. At the time of the incident there was no connection made with active SONAR, the marine biologist investigating the incident, Dr. Frantzis, made the connection to SONAR because of a Notice to Mariners he discovered about the test. His scientific correspondence in Nature titled "Does acoustic testing strand whales?"^[16] was published in March 1998.
Dr. Peter Tyack, of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, has been researching noise's effects on marine mammals since the 1970s. He has led much of the recent research on beaked whales (and Cuvier's beaked whales in particular). Data tags have shown that Cuvier's dive considerably deeper than previously thought, and are in fact the deepest diving species of marine mammal. Their surfacing behavior is highly unusual because they exert considerable physical effort to surface in a controlled ascent, rather than simply floating to the surface like sperm whales. Deep dives are followed by three or four shallow dives. Vocalization stops at shallow depths, because of fear of predators or because they don't need vocalization to stay together at depths where there is sufficient light to see each other. The elaborate dive patterns are assumed to be necessary to control the diffusion of gases in the bloodstream. No data show a beaked whale making an uncontrolled ascent or failing to do successive shallow dives.
The whales may interpret the unfamiliar sound of SONAR as a predator and change its behavior in a dangerous way. This last theory would make mitigation particularly difficult since the sound levels themselves are not physically damaging, but only cause fear. The damage mechanism would not be the sound.

http://www.devilshopyard.com/HAARP.html

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread666454/pg1

Mark Madoff Son Bernie Madoff Murder Or Sucide

 Alex Jones Didn't Predict 9/11 Bill Cooper Did

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JHqB7w9WSI&feature=channel

BILL COOPER LAYS OUT THE NORTH AMERICAN PERIMETER [NAU] and THE US (NWO) SEAL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fuis1Iv6Sgw

 

Mark Madoff Was Murdered For Money !!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8xbNOn4bnk

Was Mark Madoff Murdered?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXRrXOYgSSg

Steine Sind Steine...Was Hitler right? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxcaZlYpADQ

Madoff Son Found Dead On 2nd Anniversary of Dad's Arrest
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBrug1x1aHo&feature=related

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Madoff
Excerpt:
Mark Madoff owed his parents $22 million, and Andrew Madoff owes $9.5 million. There were two loans in 2008 from Bernard Madoff to Andrew Madoff: $4.3 million on October 6, and $250,000 on September 21.^[48][49] Andrew owns a Manhattan apartment and a home in Greenwich, Connecticut, as did Mark^[28] prior to his death by apparent suicide on the second anniversary of his father's arrest.^[50]

http://www.allvoices.com/s/event-7591380/aHR0cDovL3VzdHJlbmR6LmJsb2dzcG90LmNvbS8yMDEwLzEyL21hcmstbWFkb2ZmLXNvbi1iZXJuaWUtbWFkb2ZmLW11cmRlci1vci5odG1s
Excerpt:

Mark Madoff Son Bernie Madoff Murder Or Sucide

at 9:12 PM Posted by Mayo Brothers 0 comments

Mark Madoff, 46, son of Wall Street's most notorious swindler AOs, Bernie Madoff, has committed suicide on the second anniversary of his father, the arrest of the PM, adding another chapter to the tragic family saga.Marcos and his brother, Andrew, were investigated as part of his father, the Ponzi scheme AOs elaborate, but were never charged. His father is serving 150 years in prison for masterminding the fraud of billions of dollars.The days since their arrest and conviction have been devastating for the family. All Bernie Madoff, AOs possessions were seized by federal authorities to help recover some of the losses of investors in the scandal.Mark Madoff, OC's wife tried to legally change her and her children, the names of past administrative officers, according to court documents. She said her life had become one of the threats and humiliation since the scandal broke.Although they were never prosecuted, Madoff, AM brother Peter, and Mark and Andrew were sued by a trustee appointed to oversee Madoff, the signature of AM, which aims to collect millions of dollars to pay the victims.Mark reports made $ 66,000,000, while working in his parent companies has luxury homes in New York and Nantucket, a luxury resort in New England.Her husband was found hanged at about 7:30 this morning (December 11) in his apartment in Manhattan's SoHo neighborhood AOs elegant, police told the Associated Press.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/from-his-jail-cell-madoff-points-finger-at-the-banks-2217153.html
Excerpt:
From his jail cell, Madoff points finger at the banks
By Stephen Foley in New York

Thursday, 17 February 2011
Bernie Madoff: 'They had to know. But the attitude was sort of, 'If you're doing something wrong, we don't want to know'
 From his jail cell, the arch-swindler Bernard Madoff might finally be doing a little something to help the thousands of investors whom he bilked out of billions of dollars.
He couldn't have carried out history's largest-ever pyramid scheme, he says, without the "wilful blindness" of scores of banks and hedge funds, which put their own clients into the fraudster's fake investment business.
The trustee charged with recovering money for Madoff's victims is now suing many of those banks and so-called "feeder funds", and in a new interview from inside the medium-security Federal Correctional Facility in Butner, North Carolina, where he is serving his 150-year sentence, Madoff agrees that they were "complicit" in his frauds.

•James Moore: Madoff is an unreliable witness – but a very convincing one

Although he has refused to help federal prosecutors working on potential criminal cases against his accomplices, he has spent time assisting the victims' trustee. As he said in his interview this week, "the facts are that I alone was present at certain meetings with these [banking and feeder fund] clients".
And with a smile flickering across his lips, Madoff said: "I'm reading more now about how suspicious they were than I ever realised at the time."
The interview is the first for publication since Madoff was arrested in December 2008, a day after confessing to his two sons, Andrew and Mark, that his purported $65bn investment business had been based on lies for two decades, and that he could no longer find enough new investors to fund all the withdrawals from existing clients.

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad Steps Down youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3piuIEl0ak

http://english.pravda.ru/news/world/14-02-2011/116894-fayyad-0/
Excerpt:

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad steps down

14.02.2011 | Source:

Pravda.Ru

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad resigned

on Monday amid a desire for change sweeping Arab world.

Accepting the resignation, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas asked Fayyad to form a new government within three weeks, with the option of a two- week extension if required, reports said.

The Western-backed Palestinian Authority said over the weekend that it would hold long-overdue presidential and parliamentary elections by September, according to RTT News.

Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has already asked Fayyad to remain as Prime Minister. And the international community, which donates more than half of the authority's budget, has signaled that it will accept only Fayyad as head of the Finance Ministry.

Fatah leaders are still grappling with the party's reputation for corruption and nepotism that plagued previous governments under deceased PLO leader Yasser Arafat, Los Angeles Times reports.

http://english.pravda.ru/news/world/14-02-2011/116894-fayyad-0/

Is Wolf Blitzer a traitor?  hmmmmmm  (Assassination attempt on Tim Turner)
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread584697/pg1

I sent this out the other day and want to send it again as it is what the following blog is all about.  ...cal

JMP: Tim Turner Republic Update  1:56
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kB36UVnaNFQ&feature=related

http://www.nevadaappeal.com/article/20100402/NEWS/100409959/1070&ParentProfile=1058
Excerpt:
I am sure that you are all dedicated to reporting your local news with absolute honesty and that you endeavor to inform your readers of the truth of what is happening in the world around them. Assuming this is true, I feel it necessary to give you some more information about what is really happening with your state capitol.

Please understand that the title of the article, "Capitol locked down in wake of threats" is inaccurate in precise representation of the truth. It is true that the capitol was locked down because of "letters" sent to the governor. However, the "letter" received by all 50 governors is actually a Declaration from a lawful Grand Jury of 26 people in each state which is endeavoring to re-establish the true Republic in a peaceful and lawful manner.

http://www.republicofiowa.org/downloads/Restored-America-Our-Plan-And-History.pdf
Restore and reinhabit the de jure institutions of lawful government.



End the foreclosure nightmare (for borrowing against one’s own credit).



End tax prosecutions for resisting the transfer of private wealth to such as I.R.S. (former Puerto Rico Bureau of Taxation).



End street assaults against the sovereign People for failing to exhibit a State-issued confession of subject-class citizenship.



End all prosecutions which lack an injured party.



corporate State under a contrived corporate color-of-law venue (corp. ref. 27 C.F.R. 72.11).

End admiralty prosecutions for kidnapping and other heinous crimes against mankind as “commercial crimes” against the



which confess the signer to be a legal fiction subject of the United States Federal Corporation (“U.S. person”) that has waved

his/her rights in favor of state-issued privileges.

End the use of covert contracts such as Form 1040, car registrations, birth certificate applications, and bank signature cards



County registrars and tax assessors.

End the use of deeds which classify the People as “tenants” on their own land, thereby transferring control to incorporated



whereby incorporated “courts” presume the “right” to trespass on families and kidnap children.

End the perversion of marriage into a commercial system of state-issued privileges through the so-called “marriage license”



ownership for the state-issued “privileges” of “driving” and “title.”

End the hijacking of automobile ownership through DMV registrations which covertly exchange the divine rights of travel and



passage throughout the world free from corporate State molestation and terror.

In place of all of the above, substitute sovereign identification, diplomatic immunity and sovereign passports to facilitate safe



Restore the People’s money and wealth from the banking institutions, war profiteers, and international loan sharks.



paper on, or debts against, the sovereign People, directly or through its agencies and licensed banking institutions.

Instantly vest all mortgages, auto loans and personal business loans “issued” by members of the Fed. The state shall hold no



Instantly end all non-consensual and unlawful taxation including all taxes on the sacred rights of labor and privacy.



Empower and inspire the sovereign People to righteousness through such renewed abundance.



Issue orders to the military and police powers to enforce the Peoples’ divine rights of birth.



End the perverse act of requiring the People to pray to “courts” as is now required under corporate rules and traditions.



Restore the de jure judicial institutions including the district court of the United States and the one supreme Court.



subterfuge without provoking alarm, controversy or armed conflict.

Quietly mirror the strategies of 1933 thereby using their (our) institutions, military and public officials to undo eighty years of



Forgive all corporate actors who repent for their State-sponsored crimes against mankind. Remove the recidivists from office.



provocative actions against a general public that is mostly unaware of the hijacking of their free de jure American republics, and

their hapless media.

Do all of the above, and more, peacefully, discreetly, quietly and honorably, behind the scenes, without public proclamations or

To join the Republic, complete the form “Join the Republic Now” at http://www.republicofiowa.org/

http://www.republicofiowa.org/history.html

page 1

History

The United States exists in two forms:

1. The original United States that was in operation until 1860; a collection of sovereign Republics in the union. Under the original

Constitution the States controlled the Federal Government; the Federal Government did not control the States and had very little

authority.

2. The original United States has been usurped by a separate and different UNITED STATES formed in 1871, which only controls the

District of Columbia and it’s territories, and which is actually a corporation (the UNITED STATES CORPORATION) that acts as our

current government. The United States Corporation operates under Corporate/Commercial/Public Law rather than Common/Private

Law.

The original Constitution was never removed; it has simply been dormant since 1871. It is still intact to this day. This fact was made clear

by Supreme Court Justice Marshall Harlan (Downes v. Bidwell, 182, U.S. 244 1901) by giving the following dissenting opinion: “Two

national governments exist; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress

outside and Independently of that Instrument.”

The Restore America Plan reclaimed the De Jure institutions of government of the 50 State Republics in order to restore Common Law

that represents the voice of the people and ends Corporate Law that ignores the voice of the people while operating under

Maritime/Admiralty/International Law. This occurred when warrants were delivered to all 50 Governors on March 30, 2010.

The rewritten Constitution of the UNITED STATES CORPORATION bypasses the original Constitution for the United States of

America, which explains why our Congressmen and Senators don’t abide by it, and the President can write Executive Orders to do

whatever he/she wants. They are following corporate laws that completely strip sovereigns of their God given unalienable rights.

Corporate/Commercial/Public Law is not sovereign (private), as it is an agreement between two or more parties under contract. Common

Law (which sovereigns operate under) is not Commercial Law; it is personal and private.

To understand this document, you need to understand some basic terms. Visit www.usavsus.info for complete understanding. The basic

terms are:

De Jure – Existing by right or according to law; original, lawful. Common Law operates under De Jure terms.

De Facto - In practice but not necessarily ordained by law; in fact, in reality. Corporate Law operates under De Facto terms.

Sovereign – A real person. Sovereigns can own property while Citizens/Subjects cannot. According to the original Constitution, all

government comes from the Sovereign Individual. Without the Sovereign Individual, there is no government.

U.S. Citizen/Subject – A corporate fictitious entity that merely represents the real person. It acts as a “strawman.” [To call oneself a

“sovereign citizen” or “sovereign subject” is an oxymoron, since “sovereign” and “citizen/subject” are mutually exclusive of each other.]

When asked if you are a “U.S. Citizen” on corporate legal documents, if you check “yes,” you agree to the terms of Corporate Law and

unknowingly relinquish your sovereign status and transfer all of your rights to the UNITED STATES CORPORATION since you are

now under contract.

Corporation – A non-human, fictitious entity. Corporate fictitious entities are denoted in all caps. This includes the names of

Citizens/Subjects. Your fictitious “strawman” entity is addressed in all caps, i.e. JOHN SMITH, rather than John Smith.

Common Law – God’s law. Common Law and the system of De Jure Juries apply to sovereigns in disputes. In Common Law, contracts

must be entered into knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally.

Admiralty/Maritime Law/International Law – The King’s law. Deals with criminal acts that only apply to international contracts. Under

this law, the people are no longer sovereign. The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) that the United States practices is based on Admiralty

Law. Under the UCC, contracts do not have to be entered into knowingly. Simple agreements can be binding, and as long as you exercise

the benefits of that "agreement," you must meet the obligations associated with those benefits. If you accept the benefit offered by the

government, then you MUST follow, to the letter,

each and every statute involved with that benefit. That “benefit” is the Federal Reserve Notes (U.S. dollars). By paying for things with

U.S. dollars you are unknowingly giving up all of your Constitutional rights and are legally obligated to follow all of the UCC statues. But

you were NEVER told this.

Lawful – A term used in Common Law.

Legal – A term used in the UCC which applies to Corporate Law.

http://www.republicofiowa.org/history.html

page 2

HOW THE CONSTITUTION WAS USURPED BY THE CORPORATION

(note by Panama Legal: These are the basic premises adhered to by the people in the movement and the people in the Sovereign

movement. The Government is a Corporation actually functioning as the Federal Government. Thus it does not have to follow the

constitution. Also it does not matter if Obama is not a natural born citizen since it is a corporation he is the head of. The corporation gets

the permission of the people to reign over them by deceit. This is done by wording in the Birth Certificates, Social Security Cards, driving

Licenses, IRS forms, Marriage Licenses and other documents. They always refer to the “person” in all capital letters. This means the

name represents a corporate entity. This is how the corporation courts get jurisdiction over you. Their courts do not fly the “real”

American flag. They use the military or admiralty flag. For a discourse on this try this website: http://www.usavsus.info/

What the theory is goes like this. When you enter a US Courtroom there is a military or admiralty flag flying. The US Military does not

have the protection of the constitution, neither does this apply to admiralty laws with ships at sea. When you enter a court room and cross

through that little wooden gate they have and go to the area where the plaintiff (prosecutor) and defendant sit along with judge, court

reporter, you are entering a “ship” or a foreign country as evidenced by the admiralty or military flag flying thus the constitution has no

applicability and you are under equity law not common law. The flaw with their scheme is that there is no full disclosure to the people

about any of this. This is brief over simplified synopsis of the scam run by the federal corporation. End of our comment.)

In 1788 (January 1), The United States was officially bankrupt.

In 1790 (August 4), Article One of the U.S. Statutes at Large, pages 138-178, abolished the States of the Republic and created Federal

Districts. In the same year, the former States of the Republic reorganized as Corporations and their legislatures wrote new State

Constitutions, absent defined boundaries, which they presented to the people of each state for a vote...the new State Constitutions

fraudulently made the people “Citizens” of the new Corporate States. A Citizen is also defined as a “corporate fiction."

In 1845, Congress passed legislation that would ultimately allow Common Law to be usurped by Admiralty Law.

www.barefootsworld.net/admiralty.html explains this change. The yellow fringe placed at the bottom of court flags shows this is still true.

Before 1845, Americans were considered sovereign individuals who governed themselves under Common Law.

In 1860 – Congress was adjourned Sine Die – Lincoln could not legally reconvene Congress.

In 1861, President Lincoln declared a National Emergency and Martial Law, which gave the President unprecedented powers and

removed it from the other branches. This has NEVER been reversed.

In 1863, the Lieber Code was established taking away your property and your rights.

From 1864-1867, Several Reconstruction Acts were passed forcing the states to ratify the 14th Amendment, which made everyone slaves.

In 1865, the capital was moved to Washington, D.C., a separate country – not a part of the United States of America.

In 1871, The United States became a Corporation with a new constitution and a new corporate government, and the original constitutional

government was vacated to become dormant, but it was never terminated. The new constitution had to be ratified by the people according

to the original constitution, but it never was. The whole process occurred behind closed doors. The people are the source of financing for

this new government.

In 1917, the Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA) was passed. This insightful video from [link to movielocker.com/4084)] states the

following: “This act was implemented to deal with the countries we were at war with during World War I. It gave the President and the

Alien Property Custodian the right to seize the assets of the people included in this act and if they wanted to do business in this country

they could apply for a license to do so. By 1921, the Federal Reserve Bank (the trustee for the Alien Property Custodian) held over

$700,000,000 in trust.” Understand that this trust was based on our assets, not theirs.

In 1933, 48 Stat 1, of the TWEA was amended to include the United States Person because they wanted to take our gold away. Executive

Order 6102 was created to make it illegal for a U.S. Citizen to own gold. In order for the Government to take our gold away and violate

our Constitutional rights, we were reclassified as ENEMY COMBATANTS.”

In 1933, there was a second United States bankruptcy. In the first bankruptcy the United States collateralized all public lands. In the 1933

bankruptcy, the U.S. government collateralized the private lands of the people (a lien) – they borrowed money against our private lands.

They were then mortgaged. That is why we pay property taxes.

From a speech in Congress in The Bankruptcy of the United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993, Vol. 33, page H-1303,

Speaker Representative James Trafficant Jr. (Ohio) addressing the House states:

“...It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933,

48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June

5, 1933 - Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United

States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the

United States Federal Government exists today in name only.

http://www.republicofiowa.org/history.html

The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International

Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under

Emergency War Powers. With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the receivers of the Bankruptcy have

adopted a new form of government for the United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an established

Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the

Office of the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the International Monetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page 8, Section H.R.

13955 reads in part: “The U.S. Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation for representing the United States...

Prior to 1913, most Americans owned clear, allodial title to property, free and clear of any liens of mortgages until the Federal Reserve

Act (1913) “Hypothecated” all property within the Federal United States to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, in which the

Trustees (stockholders) held legal title. The U.S. Citizen (tenant, franchisee) was registered as a “beneficiary” of the trust via his/her birth

certificate. In 1933, the Federal United States hypothecated all of the present and future properties, assets, and labor of their “subjects,”

the 14th Amendment U.S. Citizen to the Federal Reserve System. In return, the Federal Reserve System agreed to extend the federal

United States Corporation all of the credit “money substitute” it needed.

Like any debtor, the Federal United States government had to assign collateral and security to their creditors as a condition of the loan.

Since the Federal United States didn’t have any assets, they assigned the private property of their “economic slaves,” the U.S. Citizens, as

collateral against the federal debt. They also pledged the unincorporated federal territories, national parks, forests, birth certificates, and

nonprofit organizations as collateral against the federal debt. All has already been transferred as payment to the international bankers.

Unwittingly, America has returned to its pre-American Revolution feudal roots whereby all land is held by a sovereign and the common

people had no rights to hold allodial title to property. Once again, We the People are the tenants and sharecroppers renting our own

property from a Sovereign in the guise of the Federal Reserve Bank. We the People have exchanged one master for another.”

In 1944, Washington D.C. was deeded to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) by the Breton Woods Agreement. The IMF is made up

of wealthy people that own most of the banking industries of the world. It is an organized group of bankers that have taken control of

most governments of the world so the bankers run the world. Congress, the IRS, and the President work for the IMF. The IRS is not a

U.S. government agency. It is an agency of the IMF. (Diversified Metal Products v. IRS et al. CV-93-405E-EJE U.S.D.C.D.I., Public Law

94-564, Senate Report 94-1148 pg. 5967, Reorganization Plan No. 26, Public Law 102-391.)

page 3

HOW CAN WE REPAIR OUR COUNTRY RIGHT NOW?

“The Supreme Court has said the De Jure Government offices still exist but the people have failed to occupy them.

Remember Downs v. Bidwell and the dissenting opinion of Justice Marshall Harlan? He said that two national governments exist; one to

be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions. This is one that We the people need to force our elected public officials to

occupy – De Jure rule.

We need to change that by organizing Grand Juries and putting our officials back under De jure rule and out of the Corporate (or Military)

Rule that they are currently operating under.

Our elected officials will then have to operate under the limits of their Oath of office to uphold the U.S. and State Constitutions, circa

1860. When they violate the Oath it’s a capital crime.

The reason we go back to 1860 is because that is the last time we had lawful laws in this country.

Where do the people get their power to convene a Grand Jury? The Magna Carta, 1215.

Our Founding Fathers looked back to history for precedent when they decided they wanted to change their government. What they found

was the Magna Carta Liberatum, the Great Charter of Freedoms. It set a precedent that changed the face of England forever, by

establishing that the King was not above the law.

King John of England signed the Magna Carta after immense pressure from the Church and his barons (the people). The King often lived

above the law, violating both Feudal and Common Law, and was heavily criticized for his foreign policy and actions in England. The

Barons, with the support of the Church, pressured King John to spell out a list of their rights and guarantee that those rights would be

enforced. The Barons provided a draft, and after some negotiation, King John put his seal to the Magna Carta in Runnymede, in June of

1215.

Section 61 set rules for establishing the Grand Jury. It states: Since we have granted all these things for God, for the better ordering of our

kingdom, and to allay the discord that has arisen between us and our barons (people), and since we desire that they shall be enjoyed in

their entirety, with lasting strength, forever, we give and grant to the barons the following security: The barons shall elect twenty-five of

their number to keep, and cause to be observed with all their might, the peace and liberties granted and confirmed to them by this charter.

If we, our chief justice, our officials, or any of our servants offend in any respect against any man, or transgress any of the articles of the

peace or of this security, and the offense is made known to four of the said twenty-five barons, they shall come to us.”

The following url is the one used in above ribbon document (Taxes Evidence/US Gov. Denies IRS is part of the governement) 
http://web.archive.org/web/20021204164803/http://familyguardian.tzo.com/Subjects/Taxes/Evidence/USGovDeniesIRS/USGovDeniesIRS.htm
Excerpt:
The following images are scanned copies of pleadings (certified by NARA) wherein a United States Attorney and a United States Department of Justice Trial Attorney, Tax Division, deny that Internal Revenue Service is an agency of the United States Government. 
See specifically page 2 of pleadings, item no. 4.
The allegation by Diversified Metal Products, Inc., Plaintiff, for item number 4 reads,  "Defendant Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is an agency of the United States government which has presented to Plaintiff a lien against monies to which Defendant Steve Morgan, or persumably[sic] Defendant T-Bow Company Trust for him, may be entitled." 

Excerpt:
4) Denies that the Internal Revenue Service is an agency of the United States Government but admits the United States of America would be a proper party to this action.
Admits that the United States of America would be a proper party to this action.  Admits that the IRS has served Notice of Levy on plaintiff for funds owed to defendant Steve Morgan owed to tdefendant Steve Morgan.

5)  Admits that the IRS has made a demand on plaintif for payment of funds owed to Steve Morgan.  The United States is without informatio or knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations, and, on that basis, denies the remaining allegations.

6)  Admits that Exhibit A and B are attached and are respectively a copy of a letter from Lonnie Crockett and a copy of a Notice of Levy served by the IRS.

7)  The United States is without information or knowledge sufficient to form belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 7 and, on that basis, denies the allegations.

http://usa-the-republic.com/revenue/who%20and%20what%20is%20the%20irs.html
Excerpt:
The Richardson correction above verifies that the Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of United States Government, but the United States of America, clearly a distinct and different entity, would be a party of interest. It would be difficult to be any clearer on the subject, and the Rechardson correction tells us that people such as U.S. Attorneys, attorneys in the Department of Justice, and Federal judges are fully aware of the difference.
Michael Bufkin, a Dundee, Illinois attorney, undertook a delightful project. On December 18, 1998, he sent a Freedom of Information Act request to the Department of the Treasury asking for documentation of authority for the Department of Justice to defend Internal Revenue Service personnel in civil or criminal cases. In an August 2, 1999 response, Leslie Howard in the national IRS office responded with the following: "A search was performed with the Office of Tax Crimes (Criminal Investigation) and with the Assistant Chief Counsel (Disclosure Litigation) and we have no documents responsible to your request. However, you may forward a copy of your request to the U.S. Attorney General's Office within the Department of Justice."
Bufkin did just that. In response to his September 21, 1999 FOIA to the Attorney General, Thomas J. McIntrye informed Bufkin that, "We have conducted a search of the appropriate indices to Criminal Division records and did not locate any records responsive to your request."
We don't know who has lawful authority to defend IRS personnel, but the Department of Justice and U.S. Attorneys don't. Possibly the foreign "United States of America" that is principal of interest and benefits from IRS initiatives has a raft of attorneys ready to defend these foreign agents.
As chance would have it, one of the people in our group recently received certification of documents on IRS Austin Region stationary that is headed, "United States of America, Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service". The certification letters are dated November 16, 1999.
What we are dealing with amounts to invasion of a foreign government accommodated by our respective State governments. However, thanks to the diligence of people approaching IRS tyranny from several directions, we about have the whole nut documented and broken down.
Dan Meador - Ponca City, Oklahoma

http://www.topix.com/forum/city/cudahy-ca/TLHAG2T9A8K13J4SI/p55
Excerpt:

Dec 29, 2010

We‟re watching, and we need you to watch with us. We have to be more than political spectators when it comes to changing the corrupt culture of government across our cities. Vanguardians is committed to supporting and empowering you and thousands of other conscientious citizens with the tools and information necessary to responsibly demand better government.
I am writing to ask for your support through a year-end financial gift to help us move forward with a robust agenda for 2011 to:
 Restore the long-term financial health of our cities in a fair and honest way;  Protect taxpayers from unwarranted financial burdens;  Highlight the impact on individual lives when government works for
politicians and not the people; and  Provide residents with basic and crucial government-backed services in an
efficient, transparent and affordable manner.  Provide voter education materials and programs.
Asking the Hard Questions
Through deep journalistic investigations Vanguardians will ask provocative questions, investigate the quality of ...................

http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=106508,00.html
Excerpt:
Anti-Tax Law Evasion Schemes - Law and Arguments (Section V)
 
V. Fictional Legal Bases
A. Contention: The Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of the United States.
Some argue that the Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of the United States but rather a private corporation, because it was not created by positive law (i.e., an act of Congress) and that, therefore, the IRS does not have the authority to enforce the Internal Revenue Code.
The Law: There is a host of constitutional and statutory authority establishing that the Internal Revenue Service is an agency of the United States. The U.S. Supreme Court stated in Donaldson v. United States, 400 U.S. 517, 534 (1971), "[w]e bear in mind that the Internal Revenue Service is organized to carry out the broad responsibilities of the Secretary of the Treasury under § 7801(a) of the 1954 Code for the administration and enforcement of the internal revenue laws."
Pursuant to section 7801, the Secretary of Treasury has full authority to administer and enforce the internal revenue laws and has the power to create an agency to enforce such laws. Based upon this, the Internal Revenue Service was created. Thus, the Internal Revenue Service is a body established by "positive law" because it was created through a congressionally mandated power. Moreover, section 7803(a)  explicitly provides that there shall be a Commissioner of Internal Revenue who shall administer and supervise the execution and application of the internal revenue laws.
Relevant Case Law:
Salman v. Dept. of Treasury, 899 F. Supp. 471 (D. Nev. 1995) - The court described Salman's contention that the Internal Revenue Service is not a government agency of the United States as wholly frivolous and dismissed his claim with prejudice.
Young v. I.R.S., 596 F. Supp. 141 (N.D. Ind. 1984) - The court granted summary judgment in favor of the government, rejecting Young's claim that the Internal Revenue Service is a private corporation, rather than a government agency.

http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/31answers.htm
Excerpt:

31 Questions and Answers about

the Internal Revenue Service

Revision 3.7

certified by

Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

Citizen of Washington State, Federal Witness,

Private Attorney General, Author and

Webmaster of the Supreme Law Library

Internet URL of home page:

http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm

Internet URL of this file:

http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/31answers.htm

Common Law Copyright

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

1.      Is the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) an organization within the U.S. Department of the Treasury?

Answer:  No.  The IRS is not an organization within the United States Department of the Treasury.  The U.S. Department of the Treasury was organized by statutes now codified in Title 31 of the United States Code, abbreviated “31 U.S.C.”  The only mention of the IRS anywhere in 31 U.S.C. §§ 301‑313 is an authorization for the President to appoint an Assistant General Counsel in the U.S. Department of the Treasury to be the Chief Counsel for the IRS.  See 31 U.S.C. 301(f)(2).

At footnote 23 in the case of Chrysler Corp. v. Brown, 441 U.S. 281 (1979), the U.S. Supreme Court admitted that no organic Act for the IRS could be found, after they searched for such an Act all the way back to the Civil War, which ended in the year 1865 A.D.  The Guarantee Clause in the U.S. Constitution guarantees the Rule of Law to all Americans (we are to be governed by Law and not by arbitrary bureaucrats).  See Article IV, Section 4.  Since there was no organic Act creating it, IRS is not a lawful organization.

2.      If not an organization within the U.S. Department of the Treasury, then what exactly is the IRS?

Answer:  The IRS appears to be a collection agency working for foreign banks and operating out of Puerto Rico under color of the Federal Alcohol Administration (“FAA”).  But the FAA was promptly declared unconstitutional inside the 50 States by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of U.S. v. Constantine, 296 U.S. 287 (1935), because Prohibition had already been repealed.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/29188293/Diversified-Metal-Products-Inc-vs-T-Bow-Company-Trust-Internal-Revenue-Services-and-Steve-Morgan

Excerpt:
Diversified-Metal-Products-Inc-vs-T-Bow Company-Trust-Internal-Revenue-Services-and Steve-Morgan

4) Defendant Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is an agency of the United States government which has presented to Plaintiff a lien against monies to which Defendant Steve Morgan or presumably Defendant T-Bow Company Trust for him may be entitled.

5) Defendant IRS&T-Bow Company Trust, for defeidant Steven Morgan have made demand of Plaintiff for payment.

6) Attached here to as Exhibit "A" and "B" are, respectively, the demands for payment by T-Bow Company Trust, by its trustee, threatening suit against Plaintiff and Notice of Levy files by defendant IRS.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downes_v._Bidwell
Downes v. Bidwell wikipedia
Excerpt:
Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court decided whether United States territories were subject to the provisions and protections of the United States Constitution. This question is sometimes stated as "does the Constitution follow the flag?". The resulting decision narrowly held that the U.S. Constitution did not necessarily apply to territories. Instead, the United States Congress had jurisdiction to create law within territories in certain circumstances, particularly dealing with revenue, that would not be allowed by the U.S. Constitution for proper states within the union. It has become known as one of the "Insular Cases".

Contents [hide] 1 Background 2 Decision 3 Consequences 4 References

[edit] Background

The case specifically concerned a merchant, Samuel Downes, who owned S. B. Downes & Company. His company had imported oranges into the port of New York from the newly acquired territory of Puerto Rico and had been forced to pay import duties on them. He sued George R. Bidwell, United States customs inspector for the port of New York, on the grounds that, as a United States territory, such duties were under the jurisdiction of Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, which provides that "all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." Since the duty on oranges did not exist for other parts of the United States, he argued that it should not exist for Puerto Rico.

[edit] Decision

The U.S. Supreme Court decided, in a five to four decision, that newly annexed territories were not properly part of the United States for purposes of the U.S. Constitution in the matter of revenues, administrative matter, and the like. However, the court was careful to note that the Constitutional guarantees of a citizen's rights of liberty and property were applicable to all: such guarantees "... cannot be under any circumstances transcended ..." said Justice Edward Douglass White in his concurring opinion. Territories were only due the full protections of the Constitution when the U.S. Congress had incorporated them as an "integral part" of the United States.
The dissent written by Justice John Marshall Harlan held that the U.S. Congress was always bound to enact laws within the jurisdiction of the Constitution. In it, he said, "This nation is under the control of a written constitution, the supreme law of the land and the only source of the powers which our government, or any branch or officer of it, may exert at any time or at any place." He held that the Congress had no existence, and therefore had no authority, outside of the U.S. Constitution. He also said, "... two national governments exist; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions, the other to be maintained by Congress outside and independently of that instrument. By exercising such powers as other nations of the earth are accustomed to a radical and mischievous change in our system of government will result ... We will, in that event, pass from the era of constitutional liberty guarded and protected by a written constitution into an era of legislative absolutism ... It will be an evil day for American liberty if the theory of a government outside the supreme law of the land finds lodgment in our constitutional jurisprudence."

[edit] Consequences

The idea of territorial incorporation is generally agreed to have arisen from Justice White's concurring decision noted above. Note that incorporation in this case does not refer to the legal process whereby a company takes on certain of the characteristics of a person (for which, see incorporation). The concept of territorial incorporation is that the United States can be proprietor of a territory without having actually incorporated the territory into the United States. These unincorporated territories are not due the full benefits of the U.S. Constitution, as noted from Justice White's decision above.
This idea has been used in court cases ever since in affirming that the citizens of certain territories can be subject to laws and regulations that are not Constitutionally applicable to other citizens of the United States. Many citizens of territories that have been designated unincorporated have seen the principle of territorial incorporation as a form of oppression (see, for example, Román, Ediberto, "The Alien-Citizen Paradox and Other Consequences of U.S. Colonialism", Florida State University Law Review, 1998).

http://www.republicofiowa.org/plan.html

Restored America – Our Plan

The plan is a bold achievable strategy for behind-the-scenes peaceful reconstruction of the de jure institutions of government

without controversy, violence or civil war. After a national vote and approval by the body of Republic Assemblies, the plan is

now in the implementation phase to accomplish the following:

