If a combination Justice Fellowships, grand juries, and sui juris filing cannot correct it, that leaves open rebellion. Frankly I have little hope, but Conscience compels me to do what I do. I've encountered many forum tag-teams and this one is no surprise. tgsam
My thoughts when I read post #1 as well, Red. I didn't respond because I thought tinsley may be divining some interpretation of the DoI that my feeble mind couldn't comprehend.
I just read the document again to be sure . . . and there ain't one damn thing in it about establishing American laws. It merely refutes some English laws. I think tinsley likes the part about, . . . "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." Secessionists and anarchists have always loved this part.
tinsley, here's your problem. you state things and then don't back them up with anything. like everything is scripted to you. if it's gone bad, explain how, then propose a way to fix it. Otherwise, you're going to bashed like for making statements with no weight behind them.
true dat bengal. but even when asked directly, there are no answers. just vague statements. for in stance in his "lawyers" thread, he keeps mentioning "justice fellowships" are the answer to everything. but when pressed about justice fellowships and how, no answers. i found two completely different "definitions" (for lack of a better word) for what justice fellowships are and instead of explaining/discussing it, got this.... ummmmm.... ok. so he's espousing something that doesnt exist and wont tell us what he envisions. there is no avenue for discussion. none. nada. zip.
