Anti-United States Internal Revenue Service symbol. Commonly used by tax protesters and tax reform advocates in the United States. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Tim Turner is “patriot”/ “legal reform activist” who has been teaching people one or more strategies for confronting the IRS in particular and government in general. I don’t recall ever talking to or seeing the man. He’s recently been indicted by a federal grand jury for a number of alleged offenses.
Other than what I’ve learned in the past week reading two documents (1. a motion by the government to detain Turner in prison without bail until the trial; and 2) the indictment against Turner), I have no knowledge of the man or whatever strategies he’s proposed. I’m not posting this commentary on my blog for the sake of supporting or attacking Turner.
Instead, my purpose is to simply present my copy of Turner’s indictment with my various colorizing highlights and comments.
I see Turner’s indictment as instructive and even surprising. I learned a few things from Turner’s indictment. More, his indictment has even cast some doubt on principles I’d previously thought to be solid.
You can download a pristine copy (none of my highlighting and comments) of Turner’s indictment at: http://www.researchsociety.org/Cases/12-CR-00169-MHT-WC/pdf/001-20120912.pdf
You can download a copy Turner’s indictment with my highlighting and commentary here: 120926 Tim Turner Indictment 001-20120912
chrissssss...............................
September 26, 2012 at 8:43 PM
all patriots, of all pedigree’s will go down , all by themselves… there is no movement , and everyman for themselves, is a losing proposition…
Lando
September 26, 2012 at 9:03 PM
For those interested, here is a link to everything we here in New Zealand have come up with regarding the tax laws:
http://www.mindwarpsectorfour.com/sticking-it-to-the-tax-man.html
Patrick
September 27, 2012 at 6:11 AM
Hey Lando! It’s patrick…i sent you an email a few weeks back but didnt hear from ya! Glad to know you’re doing good and its Springing up in your hemisphere!
Tim Turner is a sham…I got really close to this org about 3 years ago. Met up with one of their senators and walked away when it was done. Signed nothing…
To the People…stop going to war, stop disputing, GET SOME HONOR DAMN IT!
Go to peace with the US GOV. Accept all offers negotiated on your terms. For those going, wtf – your power lies in the art of the question. Agree to discuss their original claims, but only after we first determine WHO I AM vs WHO YOU ARE. I do not play the legal fiction game except for neccesity and I’ve managed to export my soul into the CROWNS system so at least now I travel freely under the crown’s protection and all actions BY PRIVATEERS (look up that word and pirate and a cookie goes to who tells tme the real difference).
All you angry people need not apply. Find peace with you and you’ll give it out freely. I am only 29…I got really lucky or was it skill :)
peace everyone!
Patrick
September 27, 2012 at 6:13 AM
whoops…in a rush. all actions by privateers against me carry sever punishment…look up title 18, foreign dipliomats and the US GOV even says if you declare peace EVEN IF THE US GOV DOESNT RECOGNIZE IT, the agents have to honor it…
maybe ill come back and explain more if anyone is curious…
Don
September 27, 2012 at 1:13 PM
To:Patrick
You say: “I am only 29…I got really lucky or was it skill :)
It was SKILL,solid evidence of it being skill, is your age. Good luck in the future.
Don
October 5, 2012 at 10:43 PM
Hi Patrick
You say: if you declare peace EVEN IF THE US GOV DOESNT RECOGNIZE IT, the agents have to honor it…maybe ill come back and explain more if anyone is curious…
I’m curious. Please explain more.
Randy
September 26, 2012 at 9:22 PM
In the first place, why have you a;;ready passed judgement on Jim Turrner, were innocent fist, right ???
Adask
September 26, 2012 at 9:55 PM
I haven’t passed judgment on Tim Turner’s guilt or innocence. But I have viewed some of his tactics as imprudent. I don’t care what anyone says, common people can’t issue “private” bonds for millions or even billions of dollars and expect a jury to understand and take their side.
I don’t care if the procedure for issuing those bonds is 100% valid. If you’re going to court, it’s not enough to be right–you must also inspire the jurors’ respect. Jurors may not understand Tim’s legal arguments. They may not understand the prosecution’s legal arguments. But the jurors will understand that private, ordinary people simply can’t issue billion-dollar bonds.
Any defendant who issues billion-dollar bonds had better be one extraordinary speaker if he thinks he can overcome the jurors’ common sense rejection of the idea that ordinary people can issue billion dollar bonds.
We all need to realize that if you’re bumping heads with the gov-co, you are fighting the equivalent of Goliath. Each of us likes to think of ourselves as the “David” called to dispatch Goliath. But for most of us, such thoughts are fantasy.
I’ve seen this happen repeatedly for over 20 years: intelligent, rational, dedicated people get so consumed by the apparent “logic” of their own research that they take it to its logical extreme. They put their money where their mouth is. But in the pursuit of logic, they lose sight of political realities that any homeless bum can tell you are stupid.
It’s not enough to know the law when you devise and try to implement a certain legal strategy. You must also recognize the political realities that will affect how a jury may view your “legal strategy”.
I suspect that Tim Turner lost sight of the political realities that might impact on his actions. If so, his chances of winning in court have been diminished.
I’m not advocating that everyone become a politician. It’s sad that the world (and all jurors) don’t fully understand and exactly obey all law. But they don’t. If you want to win, you have to deal with both the law and “political reality”. Mr. Turner may or may not have mastered the law. But judging from the indictment, it appears to me that he has not mastered “political reality” and is therefore unlikely to fare well in front of a jury.
Don
September 26, 2012 at 10:07 PM
Hello dear friend,
Fraud begets fraud. Anyway, I don’t believe he was “indicted by a Federal Grand Jury,” he was indicted by a “Board of inquiry.” I already know that what I said is politically incorrect, too.
patrick
September 27, 2012 at 7:28 AM
A few weeks back I met a gentlemen who met up with TT. Even his close friends say they got to him…he went missing for like a week where NO ONE knew what happened to TT. When he came back his close friends said something was off…he never talked about where he was.
Then he took the republic concept and trashed it thoroughly…that congress walked out on march 27, 1861 leaving the session Sine Die is I think, without question. He built his ideas on top of that one and it was solid footing…but when you built a paper tower the wind will blow it apart…
ngonea
September 28, 2012 at 6:57 PM
Randy, I’m glad to hear you speak up, so many nay sayers against TT, don’t seem to remember examples like, Sherry Jackson Peele, X IRS agent, who went to prison for 4 yrs, not because she was guilty of any crime, she was a political prisoner, for telling the truth, TT is a political prisoner also, for acting within his rights to change his nationality which is stated in the UN declaration of Human rights, for all the UN is worth..,.
rob
September 26, 2012 at 9:30 PM
look at no. 6 IRS …….was……. an agency of the United States ?????
Jethro
September 27, 2012 at 9:53 AM
So “The Grand Jury charges”. But is the charge true?
Adask
September 27, 2012 at 10:31 AM
It remains to be seen how many (if any) of the charges can be proved in court. But it’s a virtual certainty that some of the alleged “facts” are true including the size of the alleged “private bonds”.
Don
September 27, 2012 at 1:40 PM
Jethro, did you notice where Brother Alfred said,in essense that the “District Court of the United
States” may be a “true judicial court?” Do you recall telling me that maybe “they” were only trying
to help me by transferring my petition FROM the District Court of the United States TO: United
States District Court? I don’t expect a response from you because you have not responded to my
follow up question about your “Dennis Craig” type documents. If someone doesn’t know the
difference between a lgeislative & judicial court,he/she has no business petitioning for anything in
the first place. Above all remember this, They ARE NOT here to help you !!!
patrick
September 27, 2012 at 2:54 PM
@ Don or anyone really – what is the difference between judicial district and
‘true” judicial court?
Adask
September 27, 2012 at 5:45 PM
I think the difference may be that in a “true” judicial court, you can only bribe the judges with gold or silver coin, while in the phony “judicial district,” FRNS are always welcome.
Lando
September 26, 2012 at 10:03 PM
Dam you put that well Alfred!!!!
“Intelligent, rational, dedicated people get so consumed by the apparent “logic” of their own research that they take it to its logical extreme. They put their money where their mouth is. But in the pursuit of logic, they lose sight of political realities that any homeless bum can tell you are stupid.”
Don
November 13, 2012 at 8:13 PM
Lando
September 26, 2012 at 10:03 PM
@ Dam you put that well Alfred!!!!
He dam shore did. The shore is where the water line from the “dam” is. I’m shoar of that. Sure, I could be wrong but no one has proven it, YET. :)
Adask
November 13, 2012 at 8:35 PM
We can all be wrong. Nothing amazing in that. But can we all admit when we’re wrong? Especially to ourselves? That’s when it gets to be amazin’.
Micky
September 27, 2012 at 2:51 AM
I wondering? Do any of you know that our country has been in bankruptcy since 1933? And did you know that every American was put up for collateral? And did you know that the government you call the United States of America is not your government? It is a corporation? And does anyone know what a Fema Camp is? Fema Camp and Rex 84 is a must look up on Utube. And do you realize that the President was not elected, he was selected? This is just the tip of the Ice Berg people. The government does not work for the people and hasn’t for years. Civil Rights! Why aren’t our kids taught civil rights in school anymore. Why? Because if people knew their rights, we wouldn’t be in this mess we are in. And the government knows this. You all need to do your homework. Read the constitution and the bill of rights. Do your own research and you’ll be amazed what the government been doing behind your back when no one was watching. And the taxes you pay. You think they go to our school, for our infrastructure, etc? Think again. Do your homework. You won’t be happy. Like I said, this is the tip of the ice berg. The government arrested Tim Turner because he is a threat to them. It’s not about taxes. It’s about your rights as a person, one of the people. This country belongs to us. The people are suppose to have the last word, not them. Wake up! Wake up before it’s to late and we’re in a fema camp. One last thing.
Look up once in a while. Ever wonder what their spraying? What all those lines are in the sky? It’s not baby powder.
Don
September 27, 2012 at 1:50 PM
Hello Micky,
You say: “This country belongs to us”
If someone steals something from you, it still belongs to you, but someone else has it so it
belonging to you doesn’t help much
Micky
September 27, 2012 at 10:56 PM
your right!
Don
September 27, 2012 at 8:55 PM
Micky,September 27, 2012 at 2:51 AM; I wondering?
Yeah, I wonder too ! Sometimes I even wonder about me !
Don
September 30, 2012 at 9:06 PM
To: Micky,
WOW !!! You are really UP on everything & FAR ahead of the rest of us stupidians. Now I wondering too!! Your question is re: Civil Rights! Why aren’t our kids taught civil rights in school anymore. Why?
Why would you want your “kids”(offspring of a goat) to know about “civil rights” unless you are a “person of color?” And, NO!!! None of us know what a fema camp is & we didn’t know that the U.S. Government is a Corp. You,Micky, say:The government does not work for the people and hasn’t for years.WOW !!! NO KIDDING !! I sure didn’t know that either!! I THANK YOU, & more than words can say !!! You sure woke me up !!! It’s not baby powder ?!? OH NO !!! You ask: “What all those lines are in the sky? ”
At first I thought it was a bird, then upon deeper examination, I said to myself, NAW, it must be a plane !! Then I saw it clearly !!! IT’S SUPERMAN !!! BUT, Befrore that and for so long I thought it was BABY POWDER !!!
Don
November 13, 2012 at 8:32 PM
@ “And did you know And did you know And did you know And did you know …..”
I did know,but I guess I just forgot.
@”And do you realize…….”
NAW,you’re jivin me. :)
@”The government does not work for the people and hasn’t for years.”
When did the government “stop” working for the People? You did not say,never has worked for the People. What was the year the Government stopped working FOR the People?
@Do your own research Do your homework.
Good idea, Let me know what you discover.
Jethro
September 27, 2012 at 9:51 AM
Al,
Regarding the name of the defendant (“JAMES TIMOTHY TURNER, a.k.a. ‘Tim Turner’”) I believe that your analysis is likely correct insofar as “JAMES TIMOTHY TURNER” indicates a CAPACITY. As long as the defendant (allegedly) acted within that CAPACITY, he could also be known as “Tim Turner” or whatever. As for what that capacity is, I believe we’ll find a clue in the “GOVERNMENT’S MOTION FOR DETENTION” (http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/6421/indictmentwpacerfinanci.pdf – starts on p. 15). Under “4. U.S. Passport” it states that there has been a “finding that [TURNER] is, in fact, a United States citizen”. That finding must have been made by the U.S. State Dept.
So now we have a U.S. citizen [capacity] defendant acting within the “Middle District of Alabama” [also a capacity?], in which case the defendant could be “a.k.a.” almost anything, but he’s still acting in that CAPACITY. So I believe your “formula” is likely still sound insofar as it’s clear what the “a.k.a.” refers to.
Don
September 28, 2012 at 12:22 AM
Tim Turner case excerpt:
The United States is prepared to prove at a detention hearing…
WOW ! Does this mean we now have a “talking United States !?”
Don
September 30, 2012 at 1:07 AM
To:Jethro,
You say in pertinent part,on, September 27, 2012 at 9:51 AM
“………the defendant could be “a.k.a.” almost anything,……”
“anything” is a more accurate answer than “almost anything,” e.g.
The Federal Reserve IS a private Corp. BUT it depends on the “circumstances” whether the Courts think so or not. IF the Federal Reserve is sued in the capacity of a corp. the courts will say they do not have jurisdiction, because the Federal Reserve THEN becomes a “Federal Government INSTRUMENTALITY.” Sue IT in that sense (instrumentality), & the courts rule that they do not not have jurisdiction, because the Federal Reserve is a PRIVATE CORPORATION.
Micky
October 2, 2012 at 3:39 PM
Courts are corporations too! The courts job is to raise money. The more people they incarcerate, the more money they make. Check it out. Can’t trust any of them.
sem
September 27, 2012 at 12:07 PM
This subject reminds me of a Spike Lee movie entitled, “Do The Right Thing”. It is also remanissant of the fact that, “Anything you say and/or do, can and will be used against you in a Court of Law.”
PeaceOut
sem
September 27, 2012 at 1:15 PM
Excerpt from JSMindset:
We must all carry out our dharma (duty), whether that is to be an emissary of peace or to fight a great war. In one way we are all fighting a great war; the one within ourselves to separate the light from the dark as we separate chaff from wheat. To be able to emerge victorious in that war of self-realization takes great effort but starts with the simplest and humblest step of believing that we are indeed worthy and can win it.
–SSB
Don
September 27, 2012 at 3:43 PM
To who it may concern,
Re:Politically Incorrect.
Quoting a friend: “Someone shouted at me today for making fun of Jews. He said it was politically incorrect. That was before he found out that I was Jewish, and making fun of ourselves is a part of Jewish culture.”
Ok so I’m mixing apples with oranges. To me, it is interesting that the “indictment” spells out verbatim, the word “Dollars” in several places. A FRN is not a dollar, it’s a NOTE. If I need to be more specific about what a “note” is,forget it. There is a lot of “food for thought” in what I have already said, but only for those who have the “wit” to see it. WHERE IS THE BEEF?
pop de adam
September 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM
Found this interesting piece recently. While not exactly related to TT it might be “progress”:
http://marcstevens.net/articles/hung-jury-in-mikes-tax-evasion-prosecution.html
Don
September 27, 2012 at 8:41 PM
@ Don or anyone really – what is the difference between judicial district and
‘true” judicial court?
Because a Rose by any other name is really a porcupine.
James Barnes
September 28, 2012 at 12:28 PM
Marc actually brings a lot of the sham of the so called justice system to light as the just-us system with his stick to the facts and evidence logic, Any time the STATE charges you with anything it’s a total and utter fraud. Examine history Law has always been (until recently) about restoring some injury or damage done by a perpetrator to a man (made male or female) with an intention of harm or blatant negligence on their part. You cannot get a fair trial when the fiction known as the STATE is in involved and that can be easily proven with the facts that. 1. The STATE (a fiction) is the plaintiff and doesn’t exist in reality and you do! 2. There is a blatant conflict of interest when, the judge is paid by the STATE, the persecutor is paid by the STATE, your public defender is paid by the STATE (and is obligated to obey the judge as an officer of the court), the cops are paid by the STATE, the clerk is paid by the STATE, and the bailiff are paid by the STATE and everyone of them has a vested financial interest to find you guilty and steal money (or make money off you in prison) from you come hook or crook! If a man isn’t coming against you personally to recover what you have damaged him for in reality you are being screwed. Why do you think OJ won the criminal trial but lost the civil one. The STATE never has standing to complain, because everything the men representing the fiction known as the STATE has is taken by force and fraud from US, in reality. The STATE today is violent men with badged, costumed, armed thugs acting to steal as much of your money as they possibly get away with while pretending it is morally right. It’s not rocket science when you get out of your mental indoctrination that was programmed into you in school for 12 years to see the light of the truth, and trust me the more of a belief you have in the lies the harder it is for you to wake up and the more mind blowing it is when you see the truth.
A man has honor if he holds himself to an ideal of conduct though it is inconvenient, unprofitable, or dangerous to do so.
-Walter Lippmann
Freedom, Love and Peace to you all.
Don
September 28, 2012 at 5:44 PM
Dar Brother James,
Re: Paid by the STATE.
I think it’s even WORSE than you say, when you say,paid by the STATE,e.g., I believe YOU & I pay
ALL of the “self made” reprobate traitorous BASTARDS to OPPRESS us. Where does the STATE
get the “money” to pay the rogues to do ITS (STATE) will? I believe they get it from you,me, &
others who are being oppressed along with self righteous neighbors & so called friends who think
we are fruitcakes,etc. Most of our “friends & neighbors” are the most “dumb downed” of everyone involved.
Don
September 28, 2012 at 5:46 PM
Uht O. it should be Dear Brother James, instead of Dar. I Sorry.
Anon4fun
September 28, 2012 at 7:08 PM
Who besides the state should run the court system then?
Don
September 28, 2012 at 7:34 PM
Re: Your question of: “Who besides the state should run the court system then? ”
What is “your answer” to your own question?
James Barnes
September 29, 2012 at 11:25 AM
Well the way the foundational documents were written judges were to be impartial and paid with nothing being taken from them in their tenure, are judges taxpayers?, do judges get licenses from the STATE? I believe I’ve already proven they are not impartial and with the forces arrayed against you, you have little chance to win. the fact is the man or woman injured should be coming against you, or if in murder that man or womans family. Never the STATE, that makes it being a judge in it’s own cause. If I murdered your wife, would you trust me to judge the so called case? Why do you think the STATE wins like over 97% of their so called and blatantly fraudulent cases? Are you a child? Can you not write up an affidavit and state what another man or woman has done to harm you? Your giving the remedy that you deserve when you give your power to someone else to use and most people have absolutely no clue of this. Google standing cross reference it’s on marctevens.net and gives court cites for every so called states on criminal standing read, learn and realize it’s a game and you are the loser and of course your the loser because you’re ignorant. Sad to say but it’s true.
“The man who refuses to judge, who neither agrees nor disagrees, who declares that there are no absolutes and believes that he escapes responsibility, is the man responsible for all the blood that is now spilled in the world. Reality is an absolute, existence is an absolute, a speck of dust is an absolute and so is a human life. Whether you live or die is an absolute. Whether you have a piece of bread or not, is an absolute. Whether you eat your bread or see it vanish into a looter’s stomach, is an absolute.
There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil. The man who is wrong still retains some respect for truth, if only by accepting the responsibility of choice. But the man in the middle is the knave who blanks out the truth in order to pretend that no choice or values exist, who is willing to sit out the course of any battle, willing to cash in on the blood of the innocent or to crawl on his belly to the guilty, who dispenses justice by condemning both the robber and the robbed to jail, who solves conflicts by ordering the thinker and the fool to meet each other halfway. In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit. In that transfusion of blood which drains the good to feed the evil, the compromise is the transmitting rubber tube.”
― Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
Freedom, Peace and Love to you all.
sem
October 8, 2012 at 12:26 PM
Ayan Rand was a Sociopath.
Adask
October 8, 2012 at 12:53 PM
Yeah, but she was a snappy dresser.
Actually, she was brilliant, but there was a fundamental flaw in her philosophy: she was an atheist. If she’d been able or inclined to wed her sense of reason and ethics to a faith in God, the result might’ve been breathtaking.
Micky
October 2, 2012 at 3:42 PM
The people!
Don
October 2, 2012 at 4:41 PM
Micky,
You hit the BULLSEYE !!
The court in, Well’s v. Bain, 75 Penn. St. 39,”The People, that entire body called, The State.”
E.g. “The State of Virginia,” not, STATE OF VIRGINIA, in all capital letters which is defined
as, “That intangible thing called a, STATE, however extensive “its” powers, can never appear or
be represented or known in any court in a litigated case, except by and through “its” officers.
Justice Harlan, in, Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123.
We need to be careful however, & it’s easier said than done,when we come across key words like
state,person,citizen,etc., for the following reason. (capitalization is my emphasis)
Justice Rutledge, says in National Mutual Ins. Co. v. Tidewater Transfer Co., 69 Supreme Court.
Reporter, page 1194:” KEY WORDS like “state,” “citizen,” and “person” DO NOT ALWAYS and
INVARIABLY MEAN THE SAME THING.”
How then, can we know the difference in the meanings? I have given the answer many times,on
this sitr,but I know of only ONE(1) reader that caught it.
mstarr
October 12, 2012 at 1:14 AM
Hi Don,
Haven’t be able to get back with ya I been extremely busy. Been knocking heads with one of our big banks. So far so good.
Did I understand you right, you want to know the difference between a person and a citizen?
And to answer any questions regarding your name. Whether all caps or big letter little letter. Tom Thumb, TOM THUMB. Look at any document that you have. Driver’s lic, library card, your insurance card, credit card, etc. You’ll find them all caps. An all capital name is your strawman, a corporation, a fictitious entity. An big letter little letter is a real living, breathing person. The strawman is how the government contracts you into their jurisdiction. How they have control over a person. A person is a living breathing person. If you are a citizen, you are under the juridiction of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, all caps corporation. You don’t want to be here. This is why when you sign for your drivers lic or almost any application you sign, they ask you if you are a U.S citizen? The next time you fill out an application and you don’t mark that you are a US citizen, see what happens? You may not get what you applied for. But you have to understand who your strawman is. Then you’ll understand the difference between a person and a citizen. All caps name and big letter little letter. Wish I had more time to read everyone’s post but time is short.
Micky
Anon4fun
September 28, 2012 at 9:34 PM
Don:
There is no better option than the state to run the court system, that I know of.
Can you name one?
Don
September 28, 2012 at 11:29 PM
To:Anon4fun
I just wasted over an hour in trying to respond to your answer & everything froze up. All I saw was Not responding, but I forgot what it said, was not responding, something was not responding. I only had a few words left to say Anyway, I’m going to my word pad,try again, & cut & paste from that, my response to your response of:
There is no better option than the state to run the court system, that I know of.
In the meantime, I would like to know your thoughts on my message to you & Palani, per Driving in commerce. It is either the last or next to last comment/message,per Driving in commerce.
Don
September 29, 2012 at 12:20 AM
Anon4fun,
You say,in pertinent part: There is no better option than the state to run the court system, that I know of.
If you mean “The State” v. “This State” then, yes, I agree. My response to Brother James Barnes was refering to the sorry STATE of affairs we are in NOW, & it’s been NOW for a long time. My point was, We pay or have paid the salaries of the oppressors. We PAY, OR have paid them to oppress us. If you disagree, then you tell me who pays them. From what source does this State, that State,or ANY State derive its funds to pay the salaries of the oppressors? I would love to help pay the salaries of the “servants” in/of “The State.” BUT, I have been forced, at least in the past, to help pay the salaries of the oppressors in/of “This State.” I say this based upon my understanding at the present time of “This State” v. “The State.” This changing of words, venues, etc is MADDENING. What follows IS the answer to the existing STATE of affairs.
Thomas Jefferson said: “Rightfully, liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within the limits drawn around us by equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’ because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and ALWAYS SO WHEN IT VIOLATES THE RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE. The LEGITIMATE powers of government EXTEND ONLY TO SUCH ACTS AS ARE INJURIOUS TO OTHERS.”
Thomas Jefferson asked, “What has destroyed liberty and the rights of man in every government that has existed under the sun”? He answers by saying: “The generalization and concentrating of all powers under one body;” AND, as written in Federalist # 47: “No political truth is of greater intrinsic value than that the accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether hereditary, self appointed or elective, may be justly pronounced the very definition of tyranny;” AND, The “Father of our Country,” George Washington, said in his farewell address: “It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres; avoiding in the exercise of the powers on one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism”
COMMENT-The foregoing caveat is fulfilled for in observing the “Executive branch flag(s)” in the legislative and judicial “branches” and the U.S. Supreme Court, saying, that, “All process of this Court issues in the name of the President of the United States,” accord, Supreme Court Rules, Process; Mandates, this is “the one body,” today, that Thomas Jefferson warned of. Today, the Legislative and Judicial BRANCHES may be justifiably called, extensions of the Executive BRANCH. What happened to the, DEPARTMENTS? A branch, is an extension of its source but a department is a separation from another body. Department is defined as, a separate part or division. Branch is defined as, “any offshoot of a MAIN stem, as the branch of a stream; an offshoot, lateral extension, or subdivision, a tributary stream.”
As DENSE as I am, I understand ALL of the above, IT HAS THE RING OF TRUTH, at least to me.
Appropriate Legislation has “taken care” of EVERYTHING written above.” I wish they had just said, watch out for a “VENUE” change.
pop de adam
September 29, 2012 at 12:33 AM
if we are all brothers and sisters, what’s you problem?
adam & eve are my family
Don
September 29, 2012 at 1:04 AM
Pop de adam,
I should let your comment speak for itself. I’m wondering though, if the going up will be worth the coming down. I really don’t know much about mind altering drugs but I have a feeling you could teach me. You say: “if we are all brothers and sisters, what’s you problem?”
AND, “adam & eve are my family;”
I am more stupid than you are for responding to such an idiotic comment as yours.
I think you forgot to put an St in front of eve.
Don
September 30, 2012 at 12:12 AM
I dunno, but I bet you do,so tell me, the problem, that is. Then I will have at least one I can work on to resolve.
Title (King); Name (Yahshua/aka,Jesus); Title (President) Name( Ronald Reagan) Title (God) Name (YHWH ha Elohiym)
pop de adam, YOU are also a “god.” & so am I. John 10:34; Psalms 82:6
pop de adam
September 29, 2012 at 8:08 AM
As there is no “reply” at the end of Don’s comment I’ll just have to hope this settles where it will.
Adam and eve < Noah begets…Christ < the rest of Man < My parents and your's < You and me.
Stare decisis is rather like a lineage unless one makes a really compelling case, the testament grampa makes will stand.
Not unlike the robed fellows and their minions who might steer you off the path, I like to ask how we might have come to this place.
Who was the father of Christ, who was the father of Adam? Is God known as "God"to his dear friends or is it more like "Kevin", "Good morning "God", coffee,perhaps tea?"
(Imagine the crap someone might put up with if they named their child God)
If you think about it, and there is a rather good chance "God" and Don have also thought this, especially as they are reading this piece. I think and "God" and there for Don might think this is why some things become "Sins", we may believe we will be forgiven transgressions by God ultimately, but how will you know? If all transgressions were concieved by God, how can we, his lesser people, be guilty of them? How will we know?
I agree Don, sometimes I am off the wagon, but at least I'm not driving it. Being "Pop de Adam" should be a clue, it is the height of conceit, the zenith of hubris to claim to be the father of Adam. How could anyone know?
I say: “if we are all brothers and sisters, what’s you problem?”
I should have put an "r" after the "you"
Pardon if I set you off, it was not purposeful, whatever you do have fun doing it.
Don
September 29, 2012 at 9:49 AM
Ok, What did I say in my message to Anon4fun that prompted you to ask me what my problem is?
P.S. The term “God” is no more than a “title” like Prince, King, Queen,etc.
P.P.S. It’s good to hear that you are off the wagon, “sometimes.”
pop de adam
September 29, 2012 at 10:24 AM
I think the comment chronologicly ended up there, it was not actually directed at you,pardon me.
don said:
P.S. The term “God” is no more than a “title” like Prince, King, Queen,etc.
People sometimes look paternalisticly to these sovereigns as a source of knowledge, wisdom, meaning and guidance. The reality might actually be they are themselves sorting out the very same tribulations you or I might(perhaps in the case of “God” we might even be that tribulation). So having the knowledge of this I often question any appeal to a greater power/authority, it quite often resolves to “because I said so”, but this is a non-responsive answer and not logically reasonable.
Technically we are all heirs of Adam, Noah, et al. Somehow Queen Elizabeth’s or the Pope’s claims to this earth are somehow greater and of more importance than our own. I don’t think that makes sense.
Again pardon.
Don
September 29, 2012 at 11:04 AM
To: pop de adam
Ok , I’ll say it this way then. The word/term “God” is no more than a “TITLE.” You can fill in the rest. e.g, examples.
Don
October 8, 2012 at 4:17 PM
To:pop de adam
You say in pertinent part: “As there is no “reply” at the end of Don’s comment…….”
This is part of the problem in not knowing if a message is meant for anyone in particular or everyone in general. Neither you nor I can help it if a “Reply” to click on is available or not available. Another thing is the different time zones. Going back in time, my message on September 29, 2012 at 12:20 AM was the last message on this thread AT that TIME. There was nothing else below it. Then later, a message from you appears right below mine, The time of your message was: September 29, 2012 at 12:33 AM. THEN,your message was the last one showing, AT THAT TIME. Where I made my mistake, was, I took your message to be a response to me asking me what my problem is since we are all brothers & sisters. I thought to myself, what does being brothers & sisters have to do with my message of September 29, 2012 at 12:20 AM ? I have also noticed that when I send a message, the time it says, is actually an hour later than it really is. In other words, If I send a message at 9am, & I click “Post Comment, it says 10am.
To me, the way to eliminate all this confusion is to say: TO:(whoever) Re: your message on (Here put the date). This is just an example.
pop de adam,just out of curiosity, WHO was your message of & on September 29, 2012 meant for?
Don
October 4, 2012 at 6:49 AM
Micky
October 2, 2012 at 3:39 PM
Courts are corporations too! The courts job is to raise money. The more people they incarcerate, the more money they make. Check it out. Can’t trust any of them.
Bullseye !!!!! You hit the nail on the head !!!
T. J.
October 7, 2012 at 10:18 PM
Many thanks for your mark-up on the “indictment”
Your comments provided different angles which had not previously been given thought
Tell me: Since james timothy turner has been capitalized: is he standing?
Adask
October 7, 2012 at 11:09 PM
I understand that all proper names are capitalized. You apparently attach a meaning to the all-lower-case name “james timothy turner” that I don’t understand. I understand that a name can be anything. My name might be “7102″. But, under the grammatical conventions that seem to dominate our system of law, I would no more agree that “james timothy turner” is recognized as the proper name of a man, that I would agree that his proper name is “JAMES TIMOTHY TURNER”. Similarly (perhaps therefore), I don’t understand your question “is he standing?” You don’t seem to mean, “Does he have standing?” But you’re asking me a question that seems to rely on underlying principles of which I am not aware.
T. J.
October 9, 2012 at 1:31 PM
Good afternoon:
“james timothy turner” has been capitalized: “to write or print (text) in capital letters or with the first letter of (a word or words) in capital letters”: JAMES TIMOTHY TURNER in order: “To calculate the current value of (a future stream of earnings or cash flows)” which is relative to a trust fund encompassed by: “Case 1:12-cr-00169-MHT-WC”
furthermore: standing is very important
“rely on underlying principles of which I am not aware.”: ah, do not place your-self into a position which “a man made in our Father YHWH ha Elohiym’s image” does not belong
if you find it acceptable: please place the following link to an article written for those seeking discernment regarding: standing
Peace be with you
http://chancery.co/2012/10/09/parking-or-standing/
Don
October 8, 2012 at 1:08 AM
T.J.
Re: is he standing?
He might be laying down at this time of morning, at least if he is in the same time zone as I am or unless he is a night owl. Who knows, he might even be sitting down. I wonder if he is standing up to the pressure he must be under, notwithstanding the “Board of Inquiry” indictment.
T. J.
October 9, 2012 at 1:39 PM
“Who” knows …
Don
October 9, 2012 at 3:19 PM
TJ,You say:furthermore: standing is very important.
I agree. I also think jogging,once in a while is helpful too. BUT, we have to learn to crawl before we walk don’t we?
Don
October 8, 2012 at 12:52 AM
I do not know how to cut & paste the signatures written in The Statute of 1776,aka The Declaration of Independence & I know this not techinally the correct name for/of that document but if I can bring up that document & see for myself how the signers wrote their name & surname, anybody else can bring up the document too. John Hancock, in my opinion, has beautiful handwriting, & he as well as the other signatures on the document tell me all I need to understand about a “NAME”. John Hancock puts a little “curly Q” under his “name & surname”, which was not necessary but I kinda like it anyway. However, I believe People who have “unalienable rights” can sign anyway they want too,e.g. ALL little case, ALL upper case, abbreviations etc.
Don
October 9, 2012 at 2:28 PM
T. J. October 9, 2012 at 1:39 PM
“Who” knows …
The “Shadow”
The Blind
October 9, 2012 at 11:23 PM
Suggestion: Go search “the fringed flag arguement” on google and let that sponge between your ears get good and saturated with the power of the Justinian Courts and their countless findings of such frivilous and non-sensical arguements for which they have handed down judgment time and time again.
Now, a question: When by tradition, custom Or ceremonies of honor the national colour is ordered to half-mast across the great American nation, does the National Colour resident upon the chancel positioned at the right hand of power inside the Pagan Court wherein Master Turner is to be tried, does THAT banner come to half-mast under such order, pray tell?
The sound of a nail being driven into wood is quite unbiased; for the sound is the same should it enter a wooden staff carrying an oversized signal to those whose ears are blind and eyes are deaf as the same is without regard to alter itself whether it first pass through flesh spilling the blood of the Lamb, Or the minds of men have forgotten is that being defended on behalf of the Yacht Club Commodore for HM THE QUEEN upon the land and water above the land and water, not Master Turner.
Brother T.J. is correct. One may peacefully stand or alternatively slumber in their own WORLDLY coffin, custom made, by tailor. If one elects to go to war with the government, one elects to go to war with one’s self…so sayeth me, and I AM standing.
Don
October 10, 2012 at 8:48 AM
To: The Blind,
FROM: Don
You have the right,correct,& proper name,The Blind, & you rightly use correct punctuation to describe it.with “proper nouns.” What I have to SHOW,not just say,is for those who have eyes to see.It is not for “The Blind.”
There WAS a WAR. Most People call it The Civil War.That is debatable. For the sake of making a point, let’s just call it the war between the States. IF anyone will do a little digging,study,& research on their own, he/she will see that the “Union” Troops carried/displayed a flag that looks exactly like Ol Glory, but with the “added yellow fringe.” The Confederates carried/displayed a flag called the “Southern Cross” or the cross of St. Andrew. Did these flags have anything to do with WAR?One must be totally blind if he/she says BOTH flags did not mean or “represent “anything”. The “Union Flag” represented the purpose & cause of President Lincoln. Rather than say what I believe the Cross of St.Andrew represented,which may be thought to be my own frivilous, specious, spurious,without foundation & merit opinion,I will not say,at this time what I believe the “South’s flag represented.
The Union troops won the war,so let’s ask a few questions about what happens next. Were there so called “Reconstruction Acts? If they were called “destruction acts,& from what has transpired, that is what they should be called. Today, we have “Homeland Security.” Sounds good doesn’t it.So does “Reconstruction.”IF anyone can accept that BOTH FLAGS Stood for & represented SOMETHING, then we can make some progress.President Lincoln was also the Commander in chief of the Army and Navy,wasn’t he?. Read the next paragraph very carefully & slowly.
“Placing of fringe on the national flag, the dimensions of the flag, and arrangement of the stars are matters of detail not controlled by statute, but within the discretion of the President as commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy.” 1925, 34 Op.Atty.Gen. 483.
Now lets see a little more about this “placing of fringe.” Keep in mind what the President is commander in chief of.
Army Regulation 840-10; 2-3, Sizes and occasions for display
b. National flags listed below are for indoor display and for use
in ceremonies and parades. For these purposes, the flag of the
United States will be of rayon banner cloth or heavyweight nylon,
trimmed on three sides with golden yellow fringe, 2 1/2 inches
wide. It will be the same size or larger than other flags displayed or
carried at the same time.
c. Authorization for indoor display. The flag of the United States
is authorized for indoor display for each—
(4) Military courtroom.
HEY DEAR ONES !! DO YOU SEE ANY FLAGS AS DESCRIBED ABOVE IN ANY COURTROOMS ?
Is the President of the United States a part of the “Judicial “branch” ???
Then please explain what the following words mean.
“All process of this Court issues in the name of the President of the United States.”
The Supreme Court of the United States says the above in their RULES:
Did you see the little 3 letter word ALL; & issues in the name of the President of the United States.”
ALL WHAT,issues & in whose name does ALL PROCESS ISSUE
T. J.
October 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM
That is correct: those flags did re-present some thing
One does know about the saltire: an ordinary in the form of a cross (bishop): an ecclesiastical office : ex-officio
A bishop moves diagonally on the chess board
One’s family’s armorial bearing is saltire
Further more:
You are showing: using the eyes
“The Blind” is showing: using the ears
“The Blind” is not dis-agreeing with you
“The Blind” is agreeing with you
The fringe flag is for “enrichment purposes only”
Both conclusions are correct
The Blind
October 10, 2012 at 8:59 AM
Right, right. Fringe is for enrichment purposes only…
Don
October 10, 2012 at 9:09 AM
To whom it may concern
It looks like we have a “quatloos infil-traitor” in our midst namely,”The Blind”
T. J.
October 10, 2012 at 11:42 AM
you are being adversarial: “quatloos infil-traitor”
Why?
Do not let your heart be troubled
Scripture speaks of the blind given sight
We are in a spiritual battle.
Don
November 13, 2012 at 8:54 PM
@Right, right. Fringe is for enrichment purposes only…
There is also “unjust enrichment.” Who/what does the gold fringe flag”enrich?
Don
October 10, 2012 at 12:23 PM
T.J.
You say:A bishop moves diagonally on the chess board.” No kidding!?!? I did not know that.
Thanks for the education. I take it that you,T.J. & “The Blind” are one & the same. You,telling me that: “A bishop moves diagonally on the chess board” sure makes it clear that we really are under “some degree” of martial law. Did you know that a rook moves vertically across the chess board? No kidding !! I ain’t liyn. Knowing these two critical things are two of these missing pieces of the puzzle that shows clearly the “state of the state of things. BUT, the most critical of all the missing pieces is the lack of knowledge about the PAWN. I am not going to tell you the moves the PAWN can make. You are going to have to discover that for yourself. I’ll give you a hint tho. When I play chess,we play it my way or no way.
T. J.
October 10, 2012 at 1:05 PM
One posting as “The Blind” is not me
Furthermore: why so serious?
Ewe must hold a vested interest regarding James Timothy Turner … or JAMES TIMOTHY TURNER?
Tell me: can you pick figs from a thistle?
Do ewe see that court as an act, or do ewe see a cleric performing Mass?
Eye see Don: spreading seed to wilt by Don’s adversarial prowess …
What sayeth ewe
Don
October 10, 2012 at 2:52 PM
T.J.
@What sayeth ewe
Thou Knoweth not what I meanth? I knoweth not what thy messageth meanth overall th
Of courth you realithe thith meanth WAR ? HUH? What sayest THOU ? Doth thou knoweth that whicheth thou may kisseth ? “Ewe” Thank you. That is a compliment. I’m just weary of trying to reason with goats, especially the BILLY type. Doest thou Knoweth what I meanth? I doubt it.
Don
October 10, 2012 at 2:57 PM
T.J.
@What sayeth ewe
Thou Knoweth not what I meanth? I knoweth not what thy messageth meanth overall th
Of courth you realithe thith meanth WAR ? HUH? What sayest THOU ? Doth thou knoweth that whicheth thou may kisseth ? “Ewe” Thank you. That is a compliment. I’m just weary of trying to reason with goats, especially the BILLY type. Doest thou Knoweth what I meanth? I doubt it.
Don
October 10, 2012 at 3:19 PM
T.J.
@Eye see Don:
You have just admitted you are Superman. Well look! ICU2, right through you. Stay under your rock.I have a feeling you know George Gordon very well.
@adversarial prowess …
I have no adversarial prowess. But I do know the “venue” we are in. Jails existted in “common law times” & venue too. I am also aware of the ANSWER & the ONLY Answer. I did not find the answer. The answer found me. I never found the answer because the answer was never lost. It’s that simple.
The Blind
October 10, 2012 at 11:00 PM
Don,
One freely chose to share a blessing here which was given freely unto me.
In return, I witness advesarial accusations made against me and witness your passing of judgment upon others posting here therefore; as so implied by the use of the word “we” (a conclusive presumption in fact) do not assume your venue is my venue. My alias is “The Blind”, but I believe you are the blind: for you see not that YOUR ADVESARY WALKETH ABOUT LIKE A ROARING LION SEEKING WHOM HE MAY DEVOUR.
You cannot see the boulder-sized chip IT set upon your shoulder which devours you as plainly and evidently reflected in the letters typed by your own hand.
One is finished here.
Don
October 11, 2012 at 2:17 PM
To whoever may help,HELP !!
I need someone capable of explaining the following to “The Blind” as I do not have the “prowess” to do so,remotely. That which follows IS NOT my opinion
“Placing of fringe on the national flag, the dimensions of the flag, and arrangement of the stars are matters of detail not controlled by statute, but within the discretion of the President as commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy.” 1925, 34 Op.Atty.Gen. 483.
Please keep in mind: “President as commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy” as you read the
following:
Army Regulation 840-10; 2-3, Sizes and occasions for display
b. National flags listed below are for indoor display and for use
in ceremonies and parades. For these purposes, the flag of the
United States will be of rayon banner cloth or heavyweight nylon,
trimmed on three sides with golden yellow fringe, 2 1/2 inches
wide. It will be the same size or larger than other flags displayed or
carried at the same time.
c. Authorization for indoor display. The flag of the United States
is authorized for indoor display for each—
(4) Military courtroom.
If this is still cloudy as to what is written above & the lights do not come on, then I’m not only dealing with “The Blind” I am dealing with the hopelessly LOST. Anyway, IF anyone reading this happens to be in ANY Courtroom, look around & see IF you SEE a flag that fits the above descripition. As far as courtrooms go this yellow fringed flag is only, & by statutory law allowed in a MIKITARY COURTROOM, by its own rules & regulations.
Don
November 13, 2012 at 9:09 PM
I knoweth & seeth who-eth my adversary sometimes is,except, I, at times, admit that I find out 2 late that I’m dealing with a lot of my adversary’s “human agents.” So, there are never ending times I knoweth not who my adversary is until I find out the “hard way.”
micky
October 13, 2012 at 2:52 PM
Here’s something that will really blow your minds away!!! PREPARE YOURSELF!
Watch this video. People you need to change your way of thinking and you need to spread the word. Its already to late!!!
Don
October 13, 2012 at 3:36 PM
micky,
@ Repeat a lie often enough,it becomes politics.The mind has no firewall, Subjects (You & I).
The only answer & hope is,The Good “LORD”. Does a citizen’s right to privacy include his or her inner domain of thought ? NO!! not to them !! Most people demand to be called “individuals.” They leave they leave themselves wide open to be “targeted individuals.” What can I say?
Don
November 13, 2012 at 9:33 PM
But can we all admit when we’re wrong?
When someone tells me I am wrong, it draws me to him/her because I want to know how/why,so I can correct it. But saying: “you are wrong because you just are, pisses me off. What have I ever posted that makes you think I am too proud to admit I’m wrong? I hate the word “proud.” I have posted “Public Notice of apology” on this website where I admitted I was wrong & I said I am ashamed of myself. I am not vain nor PROUD.
Adask
November 13, 2012 at 11:32 PM
You’re so vain, you probably thought my previous comment was about you . . . you’re so VAY-EEEEN you don’t even see it was a general observation. . . . Don’chu?! Don’chu?!
(If you don’t get this comment, it’s probably because you’re too young to remember Carly Simon’s A.D. 1972 “hit” entitled “You’re So Vain”. If you do remember that song, you can sing the first line of this comment along to the melody of that song.)
Don
November 14, 2012 at 1:07 AM
ADASK !!!
I was waiting for that satirical comment. It proves what I have suspected for a long time but did not want to accept. You probably don’t realize that by saying I was a “prolific” commentator that you lost some credibility with at least some of your readers. You should have said something on the order of,horrific,not prolific.I just hope that I will never achieve the level of vanity that you have. I have said before that I am overly sensitive. When a message is placed right under a comment I make I don’t think it is too unreasonable to think it MIGHT be for me, especially since I do not know how computers work & I have said this before too, many times. Was it Jack Daniels, or Old Crow you were drinking when you posted your satirical comment. Maybe it was Jim Beam.Also, if you are going to steal my comments to send back to me, say who you are stealing from like I do.e.g.
MY FEELINGS EXACTLY !!! (stolen from Alfred Adask)
Adask
November 14, 2012 at 3:18 AM
I quit drinking at age 32. I’m currently 67. I haven’t knowingly consumed a drop of alcohol in 35 years. I drank one half of a Pepsi about 10 years ago. Some friends recently bought me some apple juice and grapefruit juice. That’s pretty much the first drink I’ve had other than water in since I drank some Pepsi. Maybe it’s the apple juice that’s making me uninhibited in my comments.
Don
November 14, 2012 at 2:27 PM
To: Harry
@November 9, 2012 at 2:14 AM
Thank you Harry. The first time I saw “lol” on this Adask law website I thought it meant lots of love but that was just my thought.I didn’t know what it meant. But lots of love did not “fit” in with some of the comments so I asked those who used it if they would explain what it meant & the answers I got were: Don,You’ve got to be kidding, Don, are you serious? Everybody knows what lol means.Don, get real,etc. Most of the “answers” I get when I ask a question are belittleing etc Tell you something I do know that nobody on this “Adask law” site “seems” to. They do not seem to know what Government Issued ID is. I guess they don’t connect the “Issue” part, a.k.a. Government Inventory,a.k.a. Government Issue. If I make a mistake,which I often do, the mistakes I make are brought to my attention.. fast. Like a duck coming down on a June Bug.
Remember the song, “You’re so vain?” You’re so vain you probably think this song is about you? Now, Harry, this is not meant that I am implying “you,” Harry,are vain. It’s just that I have “seen” some very vain people on this website. Thank you, Harry, for not telling me that everybody knows what The law/rules of thermodynamics #1 IDK means.& Don, are you serious,you’ve got to be kidding. Harry, if you were vain, that’s how you would have “answered.”Thanks for not insulting me.
The above statement was made by/from me, Don, on 11/9/12.
On 9/26/12, 17 days later, Adask says, (notice the Don’chu?!) to me,Don, the following:
You’re so vain, you probably thought my previous comment was about you . . . you’re so VAY-EEEEN you don’t even see it was a general observation. . . . Don’chu?! Don’chu?!
(If you don’t get this comment, it’s probably because you’re too young to remember Carly Simon’s A.D. 1972 “hit” entitled “You’re So Vain”. If you do remember that song, you can sing the first line of this comment along to the melody of that song.)
HEY ADASK, I remembered it apparently “BEFORE” YOU DID !!! I said it before & I say it again. IF you are going to STEAL my comments to use against me, give me credit for it, show me the same courtesy I try to give to you, Once again, I said in a previous comment:
“MY FEELINGS EXACTLY!!! (stolen from Alfred Adask)
(If you don’t get this comment, it’s probably because you’ve had to much apple juice, GET IT??)
Don
November 14, 2012 at 4:22 PM
To: Alfred. I’ll try it this way,then,
Remember the song, “You’re so vain?” You’re so vain you probably think this song is about you? Now, Harry, this is not meant that I am implying “you,” Harry,are vain. It’s just that I have “seen” some very vain people on this website. Thank you, Harry, for not telling me that everybody knows what The law/rules of thermodynamics #1 IDK means.& Don, are you serious,you’ve got to be kidding. Harry, if you were vain, that’s how you would have “answered.”Thanks for not insulting me.
The above statement was made by/from me, Don, on 11/9/12.
On 9/26/12, 17 days later, Adask says, (notice the Don’chu?!) to me,Don, the following:
You’re so vain, you probably thought my previous comment was about you . . . you’re so VAY-EEEEN you don’t even see it was a general observation. . . . Don’chu?! Don’chu?!
(If you don’t get this comment, it’s probably because you’re too young to remember Carly Simon’s A.D. 1972 “hit” entitled “You’re So Vain”. If you do remember that song, you can sing the first line of this comment along to the melody of that song.)
HEY ADASK, I remembered it apparently “BEFORE” YOU DID !!! I said it before & I say it again. IF you are going to STEAL my comments to use against me, give me credit for it, show me the same courtesy I try to give to you, Once again, I said in a previous comment:
“MY FEELINGS EXACTLY!!! (stolen from Alfred Adask)
(If you don’t get this comment, it’s probably because you’ve had to much apple juice, GET IT??)
THANKS FOR THE INSULT, Alfred.
Don
November 15, 2012 at 12:21 PM
I really think you meant you’re so GAY-EEEEN. You have not seen my vicious meaner than a junk yard dog have you? Believe me,you don’t want to EITHER. Remember the warning she gave you? Don’t forget it.