And the EPA is to do WHAT!?!?!?!?

Who could defend this?

That would be like trashing someone who was stalked, confronted and then gunned down when they were only going to the store and back home.

And of course, you performed your speciality of misinterpretation of what was said.

I believe the problem is that you have dyslexia and it happens when you hear, read or see something in the public policy sphere.

And it really doesn't help matters for you when your sources are constantly feeding you mean-spirited and bogus information that you slurp up like someone on a 4th of July hot dog eating contest.

Now I understand.

Well, some define truthful as only that stuff that is in line with THEIR views, or from THEIR group.

Steve

Never said you condon it. What I was saying is you refuse to recognize the extent to which this is going on.

Sovereign. We're trying to keep that in effect. We almost lost it. The senate just voted 53 to 46 against signing the UN arms treaty - that would have dumped our sovereignty right out the window -- and there were 46 treasonous *******s in there that were willing to do that. Still - there are a lot of people still yacking that the treaty would not have disarmed us and put us under UN control --- even though, if they'd shut their damned mouths and read it, they'd have found it does just that. Thank you to the 53!

Now we have to fight the same damned thing with parental rights to their own children. If we don't get people in line real soon and fighting against this crap, not one of us is going to be in a sovereign country anymore. Yet people want to deny this is going on. They deny the corruption, even though it's being uncovered more and more each day. And, sadly, they don't understand what a corporate owned press is during a regime of crony capitalism.

When enough people don't "get" it - all of us are endangered.

BTW Wikipedia is WRONG in many respects here. GRANTED some go WAY too far with their claims of the sovereign movement, but it IS based on a lot of fact, and there ARE multiple sets of laws.

To clarify, I'll tell you some of the cases, etc... Basically, we are now FORCED, for the most part, to be placed, BY A THIRD PARTY, under a given set of rules by a law that came about, IIRC, in the 1980s. It requires all 5yo or older, IIRC, to get a social security number. ALSO, for DECADES, people have been illegally placed under a set of rules by applying for various things, such as drivers licenses, bank accounts, etc.... SOME say this happens through birth certificates, but that doesn't really fit, etc... ALSO, unlike the other things, they don't seem to be tied to other contracts. But birth certificates DO let people know of a person out there, etc.... OTHER laws, and effectively a kind of civil harassment, don't make it easy to avoid that. Anyway, part of those contracts say you will obey a given set of laws and pay taxes. And this is why state citizens will do things like not apply for certain licenses, and ask to be removed from such roles. They may be declared law breakers MERELY for not wanting to be complicit in an illegal deal!

It is a lot like those earmarks that one party may place on a given deal that is highly desired, and they will then berate the party for not passing. Sometimes,the TRUTH is that the other party WANTED to pass the popular part, but NOT the earmarks.

There is ALSO the theory that a yellow fringe on a US flag means the court is a US admiralty court. Is that true? WHO KNOWS! I DID look at the overview at cornell, which was respected, last I knew, and they said NOTHING about fringes. ALSO, I don't remember historically seeing such fringes in admiralty circumstances. We ARE tried under commerce law, as they assert, though that may be just a byproduct of the times, and so much DOES deal with commerce.

But some go crazy! Some say you must be white and christian, though neither is mentioned anywhere. SERIOUSLY! It is NOT in the constitution or related documents and I doubt you could find it anywhere else. Some say you can sue people under admiralty law, if you are a sovereign citizen, and they block your way. AGAIN, CRAZY!

So there you have it, FACT to crazy. As for common law, it IS still used. It is even used in deciding cases in US courts. HECK, look at LIAR LIAR! In the end, the defense won by using common law. An interesting side note is that it shows that the plaintiff wasn't subject to the original contract, and that the defense would have lost everything, without common law being used.

Steve