Good news/bad news for bees

Jesse and Ron should read about what Anastasia says about bee culture in book 1 of the ringing cedar series. I think you'll be pleased and amazed. Bees are mentioned beginning about page 65. http://www.sandiegoreader.com/users/photos/2016/m…
— March 28, 2016 12:29 a.m.

State Bar Yanks License of Carlsbad's Michael Pines

Instead of being a street activist, he should use the law; such as this precedent: MEMORANDUM The issues in this case were simple. There was no material dispute of the facts for the Jury to resolve. Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, which are for all practical purposes, because of their interlocking activity and practices, and both being Banking Institutions Incorporated under the Laws of the United States, are in the Law to be treated as one and the same Bank, did create the entire $14,000.00 in money or credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the Consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note. See Ansheuser-Busch Brewing Company v. Emma Mason, 44 Minn. 318, 46 N.W. 558. The Jury found that there was no consideration and I agree. Only God can create something of value out of nothing. Even if Defendant could be charged with waiver or estoppel as a matter of Law this is no defense to the Plaintiff. The Law leaves wrongdoers where it finds them. See sections 50, 51 and 52 of Am Jur 2nd "Actions" on page 584 – "no action will lie to recover on a claim based upon, or in any manner depending upon, a fraudulent, illegal, or immoral transaction or contract to which Plaintiff was a party." Plaintiff's act of creating credit is not authorized by the Constitution and Laws of the United States, is unconstitutional and void, and is not a lawful consideration in the eyes of the Law to support any thing or upon which any lawful right can be built. Nothing in the Constitution of the United States limits the jurisdiction of this Court, which is one of original Jurisdiction with right of trial by Jury guaranteed. This is a Common Law action. Minnesota cannot limit or impair the power of this Court to render Complete Justice between the parties. Any provisions in the Constitution and laws of Minnesota which attempt to do so is repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and void. No question as to the Jurisdiction of this Court was raised by either party at the trial. Both parties were given complete liberty to submit any and all facts to the Jury, at least in so far as they saw fit. No complaint was made by Plaintiff that Plaintiff did not receive a fair trial. From the admissions made by Mr. Morgan the path of duty was direct and clear for the Jury. Their Verdict could not reasonably been otherwise. Justice was rendered completely and without denial, promptly and without delay, freely and without purchase, conformable to the laws in this Court of December 7, 1968. BY THE COURT, December 9, 1968 Justice Martin V. Mahoney, Credit River Township, Scott County, Minnesota.
— April 30, 2011 1:26 p.m.

San Diego Redevelopment: They Prey, We Pray

“There isn’t enough money to pay for basic services", they say. Why the hell not, I ask? Where’d all the money go?” Answer: We are victims of a budgetary HOAX. There is no shortage of government funding! In fact, there is a huge surplus. The media and gov't and Wall St. have colluded to cover up this fact. The collective government entities’ (local, state and national) gross earnings from all sources (investment, taxation and enterprise) amounted to fourteen trillion dollars for the year 2007. The entire U.S. population’s net income, after direct and indirect taxes, was five trillion dollars (out of a gross of ten trillion dollars). The public sector is far wealthier than the private sector! See cafr1.com Over 87,000 government entities in the USA collectively own and control more investment assets than the entire private sector. Two-thirds of government's annual gross income has come from non-tax sources. Yet, only tax sources are advertised in annual budgets and “budget shortfalls” are trumpeted as the reason for more taxes and more cuts in services. What we are not shown is the real total income, as contained in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFR) filed by every entity. Even in the CAFR, assets are mislabeled as liabilities, in order to hide the truth. Finally, when cornered, bureaucrats claim that the unspent revenues are all in retirement funds. That would make every civil servant a multi-millionaire. Smells fishy. What is needed is an independent audit and statistical review of each CAFR. This scheme for skimming off up to half of public revenues and sending them to Wall St. has been going on since 1951 --60 years! As of 1999, cumulative totals of all "liquid" investment assets of local, state and federal government entities in the USA conservatively exceeded 60 trillion dollars. Totals as of 2008 were approaching the 100 trillion dollar mark. There is a remedy: the profits from this collective ownership, amassed by government, can revert back to the people to pay all government costs, resulting in the phasing out of all taxation. Refer to the Tax Retirement Fund Association (TRFA) at TaxRetirement.com Pat Palmer, Normal Heights
— April 14, 2011 1:38 a.m.

Bicyclist spits on windshield of car near Miracosta College

Everyone should listen to the videos on youtube called "Don't talk to cops". Part one is by a lawyer and part two is by a cop. Call a lawyer immediately and have him/her witness your statement, if one is called for. As for judges who withhold exculpatory evidence, they should be held responsible via an independent review board, as outlined at www.jail4judges.org
— May 26, 2010 1:38 p.m.

Letters

Re: the letter about the funding hoax. Now I understand why the USA has been in 50+ wars since WWII and has military bases in over 150 countries around the world. I just never believed that "American interests" were at stake all over the world. I thought it was just a metaphor for "our values (democracy, freedom, etc.)" which were at stake. Since our boys and girls are dying for them, why not enjoy some of those profits?
— January 20, 2010 8:17 p.m.

Scoundrels sell Kendall Street home out from under owner

Regarding "fraudulent loan packages" and banks "losing" money: MEMORANDUM The issues in this case were simple. There was no material dispute of the facts for the Jury to resolve. Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, which are for all practical purposes, because of their interlocking activity and practices, and both being Banking Institutions Incorporated under the Laws of the United States, are in the Law to be treated as one and the same Bank, did create the entire $14,000.00 in money or credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the Consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note. See Ansheuser-Busch Brewing Company v. Emma Mason, 44 Minn. 318, 46 N.W. 558. The Jury found that there was no consideration and I agree. Only God can create something of value out of nothing. Even if Defendant could be charged with waiver or estoppel as a matter of Law this is no defense to the Plaintiff. The Law leaves wrongdoers where it finds them. See sections 50, 51 and 52 of Am Jur 2nd "Actions" on page 584 – "no action will lie to recover on a claim based upon, or in any manner depending upon, a fraudulent, illegal, or immoral transaction or contract to which Plaintiff was a party." Plaintiff's act of creating credit is not authorized by the Constitution and Laws of the United States, is unconstitutional and void, and is not a lawful consideration in the eyes of the Law to support any thing or upon which any lawful right can be built. Nothing in the Constitution of the United States limits the jurisdiction of this Court, which is one of original Jurisdiction with right of trial by Jury guaranteed. This is a Common Law action. Minnesota cannot limit or impair the power of this Court to render Complete Justice between the parties. Any provisions in the Constitution and laws of Minnesota which attempt to do so is repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and void. No question as to the Jurisdiction of this Court was raised by either party at the trial. Both parties were given complete liberty to submit any and all facts to the Jury, at least in so far as they saw fit. No complaint was made by Plaintiff that Plaintiff did not receive a fair trial. From the admissions made by Mr. Morgan the path of duty was direct and clear for the Jury. Their Verdict could not reasonably been otherwise. Justice was rendered completely and without denial, promptly and without delay, freely and without purchase, conformable to the laws in this Court of December 7, 1968. BY THE COURT, December 9, 1968 Justice Martin V. Mahoney, Credit River Township, Scott County, Minnesota.
— February 19, 2009 11:45 p.m.

No Ice Cream Social

joshb, The IRS is very cordial if you agree to pay up. They were also very agreeable with Wesley Snipes, once he agreed to pay what they wanted. It's all about the money. If you look at the website I referenced, you will see just how criminal they are when one does not want to volunteer into their scheme. Their brochures state plainly that income tax is based on voluntary compliance, "but you MUST volunteer". Huh?
— March 14, 2008 4:30 p.m.

No Ice Cream Social

No I am not Wesley Snipes. His strategy was the old "do not file 1040s". That approach to avoiding income tax had been discredited years ago and Wesley never kept up with the times. The IRS used him as a high profile example to scare people away from trying to follow the law as written. They knew he was an easy target, because of his flawed strategy. Only, by filing as per the website noted in my original comment can a non tax payer succeed.
— March 6, 2008 5:19 p.m.

No Ice Cream Social

The quote in DONT TAX ME BRO, “The reporting rule is that if you pay someone $600 or more over the course of the year, you must issue a Form 1099.…" is incorrect. The actual law specifies receipt of "income" or "wages" of $600 as the minimum for filing. These are custom-defined legal terms that mean "earnings derived from the exercise of federal privilege". So, unless you work for the feds, you are not obligated to pay the "income tax". Crooked lawyers, accountants, and judges lie about this in order to help the IRS collect from non-taxpayers through fraud and force (jail, confiscation). You are conned into volunteering to pay. How? By agreeing with perjured W-2 and 1099 testimony when you file your own 1040/540 testimony. For non-federal earners the true figure to put on your 1040/540 would be zero wages. Don't forget to correct the false W-2 and 1099 testimony and send that instead. See www.losthorizons.com for details.
— March 2, 2008 2:23 p.m.

Letters

Yes, any place 2 minutes from the Ken Cinema is in Kensington, which ends at Hwy. 15. Lestat's is a mile and a quarter west of the Ken -more like a 10 minute walk. Normal Heights to be exact -a barrio every bit as unique as Kensington and far better known for its book stores, antique stores and 2 music festivals a year.
— January 30, 2008 8:02 p.m.