Darren White (dwhite93@yahoo.com) wrote:

Raymond Karczewski (arkent@arkenterprises.com) wrote:

rk: I am posting this to the Klamath Falls Forum because quite frankly, you folks are beating a dead horse with your present momentum. You had it in your grasp, and let go of it because you are so easily schnookered by Satanic Mind Controllers.

rk: By the way, this is the only article I am posting. Any other articles which appear under my name will be posted by government/media supported disinformation agents working overtime in getting me censored from your forum. So far, with your current forum administrator whose christian beliefs are being put to the test, they've been pretty successful at it. You folks have probably caught on to their tactics by now, but if not, it only goes to show just how easily you can be manipulated by mind controllers.

Namasthe,

dw: > I am sorry, but I must disagree that this is not how the average person probably feels. It sounds to me that what you are saying is that everyone is enlightened, whether they choose to work to purify and perfect this existance or not. But how can this be? Look at the world around us - we live in a world of hatred, jealousy, conflict & combativeness.

rk: The "average person" as noted by you lives in a world of Conditioned Images based in Satanic (Opposer) duality.

dw: > If we are all already enlightened, then this would not be so.

rk: When thought comes to an end, Enlightenment (nonduality) IS!

dw: > There would be no war or crime, no suffering.

rk: In this moment of communication, where is war? Where is Suffering?

dw: > We must work to go back to that state of enlightenment, which is one of pure awareness and pure experience.

rk: One must work to create war, to create suffering, for all war and suffering exists only in the dualisic state of mind ruled by a Satanic Intellect. Absence of dualism is PEACE.

dw: > We must practice our sadhanas and open ourselves to the inner divinity that we all possess, to shed all that which is not our True Self.

rk: Practice is work. Work is dualism, struggle, suffering, achievement. Hell, isn't it?

dw: > I agree with what you are saying in regard to pure awareness. It is easy to get caught up in thoughts and concepts to the point that we are no longer experiencing something in it's pure state, but we are analyzing an intellectual representation of that thing.

dw: > For example...if you are looking at a beautiful sunset and enjoying it so. The moment you think to yourself "Wow, what a beautiful sunset." you are no longer truly experiencing that sunset. You are creating a concept of it in your mind that is a perception which you are now experiencing instead.

rk: Now you've got it. Why throw it away for the domination of thought which rules your present state of consciousness?

dw: > Also, what you say about being perfect at this moment in time is very true. Because we are only existing in this moment in time. The person that we were 30 seconds ago no longer exists, and the person of tomorrow has yet to come.

rk: So far, so good.

dw: > But we should be aware that there is a higher divinity within that we all must aspire to.

rk: Ah! Aspiration -- the seduction of Satanic Intellectual greed takes its toll once again! In the above statement you have conjured up some positive images and extracted a modicum of pleasure from it, but in fact, you have demonstrated that you have fallen into the unremitting realm of dualism, have you not? It is a fall from Holistic Intelligence into the conflicted, fragmented realm of Intellectual limitation -- IGNORANCE. You've just demonstrated man's "Fall from Grace!"

dw: > Otherwise we would all be ascended masters already, and we would have no reason to even be on this newsgroup.

dw: > Then again, if this point of view has not been experienced by you, then for you it is untruth, which is OK and a very profound understanding that you possess.

Namasthe,

Darren

rk: Meditate. Get quiet. When thought ends, TRUTH IS. That is the Christ State of Consciousness manifesting itself in the eternal moment of NOW. Resonate with that vibration. Be At-One with it. Let it guide you in all things.

rk: When you return to your usual time-bound dualistic state of Consciousness, pay attention. Be aware of the marked shift in vibration. Discriminate the vibratory differences between nondualistic essence of TRUTH and the dualistic essence that is the THOUGHT OF TRUTH.

rk: Utilize thoughts for technical problem solving. In all nontechnical matters PAY ATTENTION and allow TRUTH to guide you in word and action.

rk: Let Go -- Let God!

rk: Surrender to the holistic (holy) spirit of divine intelligence which will guide you and protect you from the Satanic Assaults of the Time-bound, thought based, Satanic Ruled World of Civilized Man.

rk: If you want a demonstration of that, visit http://www.arkenterprises.com/dialchst.htm and read all articles marked "***." In no time at all you will come to discriminate the radically different vibratory essences of Heaven (Truth) and Hell (Satanic ruled dualism).

rk: The remainder of the post is quite accurate despite its appearance of spiritual quibbling.

BecomeLucid wrote:

>> RvB (postmaster@interconnect.nl) wrote in message news:(iadvtkla42b4vi63rq171hf2rhcor7p06@one.xs4all.nl)...

On 17 Nov 2001 09:24:01 -0800, mobile_tuneups@yahoo.com (BecomeLucid) wrote:

> > >'Enlightenment' is a word/concept made up to keep the inhabitants of a certain blue planet bound within a certain limiting cosmic worldview of themselves and their surrounding universe. This blue planet co-exists within a vast intelligent galactical universe, with other intelligent beings, living on other intelligent planets, working to try and "free" this blue planet and other planets in the same predicament.

> > >'Enlightenment' is a very clever concept created to make you think you are less then what you already are.

> > Unfortunately, freeing yourself from concepts is called ... enlightenment.

> There is no 'freeing'. (Unless you mean seeing that you already are "enlightened".)

> * On a different note, see below.

> Again.... --

> = You ARE = = This moment is * A L L * that exists =

> = This moment exists in its own inherent pristine perfection =

> It is the massive infrastructure that convinces you that at this exact moment in time, you and this present moment do NOT exist in its own inherent pristine perfection.

> Another way of saying it is, you are "perfect" at this exact moment in time, don't let any one tell you otherwise. -

> "We *ARE* what we think, all that we ARE arises with our thoughts"

> .....The Dhammapada (*NOT* endorsing The Dhammapada, just quoting highly intelligent words from it.)

> * I get the feeling you're saying to observe thought and then thereby go to that space where there is only motionless observation, where then you become one with this motionless observation. In this awareness, you become intimately aware that there is no such thing as "movement". Your background or point of observation is simply pure awareness. You become aware that what you define yourself as, is simply that a definition you've chosen. But existence is Cyclic/Circular. Once you've gone there, you can choose to go back to 'acting' and 'doing'. I guess I could even chose to forget what I know, in order to do the whole thing again. These 'cycles' just goes on and on forever, over vast amounts of "TIME". You go in the 'nothingness', you come back out. You go in, come back out, etc.

> This whole cycle is repeated on a mini scale each night when you fall asleep, of course we're just not aware of it.

The following libelous attacks arise from the keyboards of assorted anonymous government/media disinformation agents who through disruption, intimidation, and character assassination control the flow of information on public Usenet Newsgroups/Forums

I guess Ray thinks this makes him sound real Biblical-like

Re: "Wherein Doest it Exist????!" (Not in you, that much is for sure!)

Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 14:13:45 GMT

From: Compelling ideas don't need weird words (unknown)

Here's a tip for you Ray: you don't need weird language if your ideas are sound and compelling. The fact you feel the need to resort to ridiculous, historical-sounding non-words to make yourself feel important and wise is the first sure-fire sign you are neither. What you say here is nothing new at all, and you must realize this since you felt compelled to make up strange Biblical-like sounding words to make it seem novel. Try thinking your own thoughts and expressing them CLEARLY and CONCISELY. If they have merit, people cannot help but respond with respect. If they don't, that just tells you your own conceit is blinding you to the bankruptcy of your words and conduct here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here's an idea

Re: Enlightenment, Enlightenment, Wherein Doest It Exist? (Raymond Karczewski)

Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 00:58:25 GMT

From: Your character makes your words empty (unknown)

Repent for all the suffering you put people through, including your own children, take responsibility for all the legal problems you are still running away from here and in other states, act like an ADULT for a change, and maybe you'll have a possibility of credibility some day. As it is you're like some adolescent spouting words you read in a book but obviously don't understand for lack of life experience, but you think they make you sound wise. Your sound like some pompous two=-faced self-serving hypocrite. Which is exactly what you are. Your actions and words are universes apart, and until that separation is GONE, your words ring like the empty husks they are.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In a word, YES

Re: Have youalways been a syphilitic drooling fool? (Nutwatcher)

Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:04:36 GMT

From: Ray wallows in his mental illness (unknown)

Reply

Fr. John W. Morris responds;

Raymond Karczewski (arkent@arkenterprises.com) wrote:

jwm: >Your problem is that you try to understand with your mind mysteries that no human can understand. Suffering is a mystery that we cannot understand. Read the Book of Job. It tells us this. We are mortal sinful humans, we cannot understand God or the ways of God, because God is immortal and sinless.

Fr. John +

John,

rk: Spoken like a true pharisee. There is much to life that our mortal minds are unable to grasp, but suffering is certainly not one of them. Suffering is no mystery to an open, discriminative mind, able to function in a balanced and untethered manner.

rk: Suffering is the outcome which manifests in the lives of all who find themselves living in a state of constant contradiction produced by the confusion of filtering their perceptions of life through a fragmented, dualistic, conditioned mind. When you answer a rather simple question by couching it in mysticism, as you have above, you are performing your priestly schtick, aren't you? You misdirect an enquiring mind, sending it into the morass of superstition and belief. In doing so you, and others of your profession, create for yourselves a codependent relationship with others which may then be exploitable.

rk: If one looks closely enough, one sees the professional problem solvers of our society are also the problem makers. They, through the illusion of authority, confuse lesser intellects, creating doubt, then temporarily allay such doubt with their credentialed knowledge. That is the essence of magick, the basis upon which the control over the many by the Satanic few is accomplished and perpetuated.

rk: Contradiction manifests when manipulating mindcontrollers impose unnecessary and extraneous rules upon an otherwise uncluttered consciousness, an uncivilized consciousness.

rk: Please don't tell me that we need rules to control each other. An uncluttered consciousness is a clear consciousness, an uncorrupted consciousness. Clarity is order. Corruption engenders disorder. This is the old chicken or egg concept, is it not? If one does not tell another how they should live, how can there be conflict in relationship?

rk: The only rule necessary to bring order to any society is found in the Golden Rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Harm no one, but reserve the right for self-defense, then do what is necessary to protect oneself--including deadly force.

rk: Would one give second thought to using deadly force against the life threatening attack of a wild animal? Of course not. One has a clear duty to protect one's life. It is through the hypnotic mind-numbing, limiting confusion of words that man is trained into a state of paralysis in times of such crisis.

rk: The right to self-determination and self-defense is stripped away from sovereign human beings by corrupt governments and religious institutions which create a mindset of impotence and dependence upon authorities who are themselves unable to deliver on their promises of protection in such moments of real personal danger. Who can question that such an event is a lesson which must be experientially dealt with by the experiencer? It is their problem to deal with. No institution or person can realistically remove that "in the moment" burden from the victim.

rk: That is how masses of peoples are enslaved to fear. By taking away their "inalienable right to life" by a remote and ineffective system of police who cannot guarantee to be there to protect them in their "moment of need," then exploit them should they take self-protective action, through an asset-draining legal system which begins with arrest followed by a process which creates an entire industry of judges, lawyers, bailiffs, jailers, clerks, etc., etc. when it demands of one to defend themselves against word-twisting lawyers who are experts at weaving spells with words bearing no semblance of truth to the actual occurrence.

rk: Who can blame juries for their confused verdicts after exposure to the tedium of minutia-laden arguments followed by instructions couched in unfamiliar legal jargon and trials that go on for months on end. It is all an exercise in mind control. Juries are merely the canvas upon which the lawyers paint their illusions. It would be a joke but for the fact that lives hang in the balance. This you may call justice, I call it insanity.

rk: You see, John, this is the real cause of suffering. There is no mystery to it. In our ignorance we have allowed a whole parasitical structure to exploit us from the cradle to the grave through the magick of illusion.

rk: John, that is the defect built into corrupt institutions built not on truth, but on elitist sponsored dogma. That is the defect, not only of Christianity, but of all civilized societies.

Reply

Pay Attention to the words of this Historical Document.

These words of our Courageous, Freedom-loving Forefathers brought about the Birth of our Nation.

Apply these same words to the unfolding events occuring within our dying Constitutional Republic today in 2001.

Are Americans still living in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave?

**Requires Real Audio Player

Reply

sussmanbern@hotmail.com (sussmanbern)

Raymond Karczewski (arkent@internetcds.com) wrote in message news:(3BDE073D.A7D5EAB0@internetcds.com)...

rk: >> My previous drivers license contract expired on Sept 23rd 1999. I deliberately and wilfully did not renew it. ... Instead I reinstituted my Unalienable Right to Liberty, which includes the free and unobstructed use of the public highways while travelling in my private propery for private, not commercial purposes. Such conduct has been upheld by existing case law as a Constitutional Right, not requiring a license by the State.

==========

s: > No. The US Supreme Court has made it Very Clear that states may restrict the use of their roads to drivers who have demonstrated their ability to drive safely by having a current license, and to vehicles that have proven their mechanical fitness by having an inspection tag. Hendrick v. Maryland (1915) 235 US 610; Kane v. New Jersey (1916) 242 US 160; Bell v. Burson (1971) 402 US 535; Kesler v. Utah Dept of Public Safety (1962) 369 US 143 .... and hundreds of court decisions in every state.

rk: Yes, but you forgot to mention it applies only to those who use the public highways while engaged in commercial activities of industry, business, and profit, and/or those who, by entering into a contract with the state, have knowingly or unknowingly waived their *Unalienable Right to Liberty* for the state-dispensed *privilege* of driving.

s: > Having people like you on the road diminishes the quality of life for the rest of us.

rk: Nonsense! Yours are the words of a dissonant programmable Intellect expressing its own conflicted state of dualistic consciousness. You seek to establish confusion in the minds of readers regarding the capability of anyone who is not *licensed* to operate an automobile safely and responsibly.

rk: At age 64, and being a retired California Police Sergeant, my record of driving safely for 46 years with a license and 2 years without a license speaks for itself. The license itself (a magickal piece of paper granting illusory privilege) has no bearing on one's capacity for operating an automobile safely and responsibly upon the public highways.

rk: However, should you wish to expand on your comment of just how my actions diminish "the quality of life" for, as you say, the "rest of us," I heartily recommend you do so.

rk: The laws which govern the regulation of traffic upon the public highways come under the heading of "Police Powers" as specified in the US Constitution.

rk: "The question of police power and due process must balance upon the point of making the public highways a safe place for the public to travel. If a man travels in a manner that creates actual damage, an action would lie (civilly) for recovery of damages. The state could then also proceed against the individual to deprive him of his Right to use the public highways, for cause. This process would fulfill the due process requirements of the Fifth Amendment while at the same time insuring that Rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and the state constitutions would be protected."

2: "But unless or until harm or damage (a crime) is committed, there is no cause for interference in the private affairs or actions of a Citizen."

rk: "The system of law in the United States is unique among nations because of its combination of common law and constitutional hierarchy."

rk: "Common law is judge-made law. It is case law. The only way that the judiciary can speak is through individual cases brought to it for resolution. "

rk: "Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., said: "It is the merit of the common law that it decides the case first and determines the principle afterward." He was urging that the value of common law is its contemplation of each dispute as it arises without its own situational justice. Generalizations that single-package all situations should be mere observations after the fact, not controls before the fact. To this extent, common law is anathema to statutory law."

rk: A sovereign citizen demanding his Rights under Common Law and the U.S. Constitution is not subject to the limited jurisdiction of Admiralty or Maritime law courts unless he/she waives his *Common Law* and *Unalienable* Rights and consents to jurisdiction through the simple act of *contracting* his rights away.

s: My property values are diminished if the streets in my neighborhood are plagued with drivers who think that rules apply only to other people and can't/won't qualify for a license.

rk: sussmanbern, I repeat (because it cries out to be repeated), "Yours are the words of a dissonant programmable Intellect expressing its own conflicted state of dualistic consciousness." Your energy *reeks* of the Legion of Hell-Bound "poor me's" which make up the mass of programmable ignoramuses who support Hell on earth.

s: My family's safety is impaired by the risk of drivers like you not only on the street but jumping the curb and coming onto our front lawn.

rk: My question of you is, how comfortable can you be when perceiving life through such a dimmed quality of limited consciousness that you would so readily project such illusory fantasies upon another while being so *damned proud* about exposing your ignorance to the world in the process? Where is the actual damage caused by "drivers" like me, other than in your own fearful, glitched, fantasy-ridden Intellect?

s: I pay taxes to have roads paved and KEPT SAFE, and to have policemen put scofflaws like you where you're not behind the wheel.

rk: Unconstitutional Laws have no force behind them other than the tyrannical force of the gun.

rk: A responsible man will face the gun, if necessary, when confronted by the unlawful actions of tyrants. The irresponsible coward will slink in the shadows and lick the bloodied boots of his master.

rk: I ask that you reread this post and decide for yourself where your own words have placed you.

Reply

Date: 23 Nov 2001 11:34:27 -0800

Raymond Karczewski (arkent@internetcds.com) wrote in message news:(3BDE06F0.E25FC4B1@internetcds.com)...

rk: >> With regards to the matter at hand, I do not recognize the authority of the Canyonville Justice (traffic) Court.

kd6: > So, instead of simply proving your qualification to drive by taking the test, getting the license, and paying the small fee, you opt to challenge the courts and possibly pay comparatively large court and legal fees, possibly spend some time in their luxurious accomodations?

rk: Yep!!

kd6: > Why?

rk: If you have to ask why, you are incapable of understanding the answer.

kd6: > Other than possibly proving your right to drive without a license, just what will you gain?

rk: The use of the word gain is inaccurate. The word *regain* is more appropriate.

rk: What is to be regained are one's Unalienable Rights to *Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.* Sounds Hokey, huh?

rk: Think so? Well look about your community, pay attention to the news media's daily conditioning you to accept ever-increasing government tyranny. Hell, they now have military tanks at airports of our Nation. (See the story on Miami).

rk: Observe the acceleration of government's infringement upon your rights, my rights, the rights of all Americans since the 9-11 attack upon New York's World Trade Center. It is being sold on the premise of implementing security programs to protect against foreign terrorists, but ask yourself who is being affected by it directly. If you said you, me, and the average citizen, you are correct.

rk: The legislation is designed to separate, to divide, and yes, to conquer peoples according to their race, their level of intelligence, and their level of integrity. By the way, kd6, if you are stumped on what I mean by "Intelligence" and "level of Integrity," you have already exposed that to the world with your attitude of capitulation even before you have been put to the test directly. Your questions arise from both a lack of intelligence and Integrity. As such, my response is not directed to you but to others who have not yet answered those questions for themselves.

rk: What is occuring in these United States of America is the death of the US Constitution and a return to the Dark Age system of Feudalism wherein the present three classes of people (poor, middle class, and wealthy) are being replaced with only two classes -- Masters and Slaves.

rk: Note the freedom-restricting Legislation being shoved down the throats of docile American people, most of which was never read by the people's elected Legislators before they passed it. In your heavily conditioned, Politically Correct thinking, do you still have sufficient awareness left to feel your Country slipping away? I don't feel it. I SAW IT COMING, well before it arrived!!

kd6: > Are there any others in your camp who have gone to such extremes to avoid the license fee?

rk: I stand alone, just as others have stood alone in this matter of freedom. The average person is a diminished human being, a dilettante -- his spirit broken through a lifetime of conditioning. He talks the talk, but that's where it all ends. One sees this clearly in the Patriot movement. All organized groups are Satanic in their Origin. They feed the frenzy of opposition and go to their deaths as ignorantly as they lived.

rk: No, I belong to no "camp" or organization. The secret to restoring our U.S. Constitution is for individuals to stand alone on their own two feet. The only thing which unites them is their love of TRUTH and their manifest INTEGRITY.

rk: Men and women of Truth understand the illusion of government. They stand alone, armed only with the sword and shield of Truth to protect them.

rk: TRUTH must always be put to the test, but once ventured, it places one in the hands of the Holistic (holy) Spirit of Divine Intelligence, God. Those able to live so, fully understand the essence of the statement, "and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it."

rk: We have a country of 380 million. Plainly and simply put, There are MORE OF US THAN THERE ARE OF THEM!!! Or is the statement that the United States of America is a Government "Of the People, By the People, and For the People" merely a deceptive slogan used to schmooze and control an ignorant populace?

rk: Look at the laborious, heavy, foot-dragging, tyrannical system of government at work. They attempt to control the collective mindset of 380 million through force, fear, and the magickal venue of illusion, of mind control. They manipulate thought patterns of inert millions who rely upon the privately owned media as the sole provider of their news of the world.

rk: The one thing government and media cannot manipulate is TRUTH.

rk: When a simple man of Truth, a Christ, stands alone against the combined Satanic power of legions of fallen human beings, he/she raises the Hell which pervades the mindset of people like yourself -- those who ask foolish questions.

rk: When government/media meets a man/woman of Truth, a Christ they are impotent to deal with them, so they ignore them, treat the issue as though it doesn't exist and, behind the scenes, feverishly work to maintain their STONE WALL of SILENCE which only darkens the lives of the rest of an already *dumbed-down* populace. That is the Hell of Mind Control. Who amongst you can deny it?

rk: If you want a direct example of the cowardice and inertness of the American people who demonstrate their inability to take charge of their own lives, I invite you to visit the petition at: http://www.PetitionOnline.com/RayNita1/petition.html Observe for yourself the handiwork and talent for dissuasion from bringing about meaningful change within our country by media mind controllers.

kd6: > Is all this worth it?

rk: That's a question everyone must answer for themselves when their "moment of Truth" comes!!

Reply

23 Nov 2001 13:07:39 -0800

rk: >> Yes, but you forgot to mention it applies only to those who use the public highways while engaged in commercial activities of industry, business, and profit, and/or those who, by entering into a contract with the state, have knowingly or unknowingly waived their *Unalienable Right to Liberty* for the state-dispensed *privilege* of driving.

===============

s: Wrong again. There is nothing in current law that exempts "noncommercial" motorists from the licensing requirements.

rk: You just don't get it, do you? Or is it perhaps that you got it but don't want others to get it?

rk: Our Declaration of Independence states: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

rk: Our country was founded upon such Unalienable Rights. What the Creator has granted, goverments cannot take away.

rk: Unalienable/Inalienable = "incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred." These God-given rights cannot be abridged, infringed upon, surrendered, transferred, converted, or legislated out of existence, nor can they be converted into privilege by man's law unless they are waived by contract.

Bouviers Law Dictionary, sixth edition, defines UNALIENABLE as :

1. The state of a thing or right which cannot be sold.

2. Things which are not in commerce, as public roads, are in their nature unalienable. Some things are unalienable, in consequence of particular provisions in the law forbidding their sale or transfer, as pensions granted by the government. The natural rights of life and liberty are unalienable.

rk: You see as long as our U.S. Constitution remains in effect in this country, this issue of a government dispensed drivers license privilege is moot, beyond debate. It is certainly beyond the ability of our government to strip away our Rights through legislation. Legislation applies to the Corporate Person, not the Natural Person.

rk: How do they get around it? Through deception, intimidation, coercion and fraud. Your friendly Dept. of Motor Vehicles, regardless of in which State it is located, as a matter of policy withholds vital information from the road-travelling public regarding their rights while conditioning them into "believing" one's Unalienable Right to Liberty, which includes free and unencumbered Travel upon the public highways in one's private property (automobile) for private, noncommercial purposes/transportation IS A PRIVILEGE.

rk: Were you advised of your rights before signing your name on the contract (license) application? I bet not!!

rk: Who among you would seek a license which binds you to all of the terms of the unilateral, nonnegotiable contract which include fines, incarceration, schools, counseling and other satellite programs of a growing judicial/enforcement/penal industry for violating infractions and regulations written up not by legislators but by a non-accountable bureaucracy designed to regulate the commercial use of the highway by business and industry?

rk: The average person has to waive his/her rights to find themselves in the type of exploitive soup that destroys lives while it builds an everincreasing power base for its exploitive politicians, judges and bureaucrats.

rk: In rendering one's signature upon the dotted line of the application, one gives the government's Admiralty/Maritime Courts jurisdiction over them as they blindly accept the yoke of subservience (slavery) through contract law.

rk: The only way any Unalienable Right can be converted into a privilege is through such deception, tyranny and Unconstitutional legislation. It causes a *Natural Person* to become a *Corporate Person* who waives his rights, thereby forcing him/her into the time and expense of defending themselves against UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

rk: This is the present tack taken by our government in this Rights vs Privilege issue.

rk: Our Judicial system has sold the American Public out. Just as they have sold Americans into slavery with the recent passage of draconian legislation known as the Terrorist Bill.

rk: Hypocrites within the Judicial/political/enforcement groups talk a great deal about the merits of the Supreme Law of the Land, the U.S. Constitution, but unless one insists upon his rights being recognized when they are forcibly brought before the bar, our present Court System adjudicates cases based on Corporate America law, i.e., Admiralty/Maritime law. There, contract law prevails and Rights do not exist. There are many names which may be given to such devious practices by a deceptive Judicial System. The most common name amongst them is TYRANNY.

s: > Way way back, before WW1, when private motor vehicles were still a novelty, there might not have been the same licensing laws for them as now. But for the last 50 years at least any motor vehicle on the public roads requires that the driver be licensed and that the vehicle itself be inspected and tagged.

rk: A *Corporate* person may be *required* by government to be licensed. A *Natural* person who insists upon his Unalienable rights is exempt from licensing and does not fall within the Jurisdiction of Admiralty/Maritime law. So once again your point is moot.

s: > There is no exception for "noncommercial" vehicles or trips, Crittenden v. Murphy (1918) 36 Cal.App. 803, 173 P. 724; Hendrick v. Maryland (1915)235 US 610.

s: > As for the notion of a "contract", wrong again. There is no negotiation about this. You put wheels on a public street, the driver must be licensed and the vehicle inspected and both carrying up-to-date proof.

rk: ONLY and I repeat ONLY if one is a "Corporate Person," and not a NATURAL PERSON.

rk: When Americans awaken to how they have been had by those Leaders whom they have put into office, not only will the growing momentum of the NEW WORLD ORDER be stopped cold in its tracks, but AMERICA shall returned to "the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave."

Reply

"Revolution against the CIA" (fallofbabylon@eidosnet.co.uk)

"Raymond Karczewski" (arkent@internetcds.com) wrote in message news:3BF42084.84C5EB04@internetcds.com...

rk: >> My oppressed Brothers and Sisters both here in America and abroad, this Christ says: In the dark days ahead which threaten the continued existence of this Constitutional Republic and/or your way of life regardless of where you live in the World, understand that you are your own SAVIOUR.

rk: >> DO NOT GIVE UP YOUR GUNS!

rk: >> An armed populace is the greatest security from GOVERNMENT TYRANNY.

rk: > > Our Founding Fathers understood it. Why have you forgotten it?

m: Yes America has forgotten. It is time to take up arms against the CIA.

m: Nuke Washington

m: $1 reward offered for the assassination of neo-nazi terrorists, George W Bush, Bush Sr and cult leader Sun Myung Moon. The $1 is just to keep it technically illegal; you Americans should do it out of a patriotic duty to your ancestors.

rk: Pay attention to the Satanic ruled/worshipping net provocateurs who attach themselves to the nondualistic Truth of a Christ while they slink through the frightened crowd of blind IGNORAMUSES, working the crowd into a mob, whipping up emotions into overt mass bigotry, hatred, division and ultimately a Shooting War.

rk: My only question of readers is why are you so prone to gravitate toward such self-destructive behavior? It isn't hard to see. Yet millions of self-proclaimed "intelligent" civilized human beings have not been able to figure that one out since the dawn of civilization.

rk: There's only one answer to that puzzle. Your Satanic Intellect does not allow you to see the simplicity of Truth, which is *hidden in plain sight.* You pride yourselves on self-images which are clearly BASSACKWARD. You dream of Heaven while you perpetuate Hell on earth. Answer the question for yourself. Is that the sign of Intelligence or Ignorance?

rk: Each of you reading this is a sovereign human being. Yet how many of you realize this Truth? How many of you are capable of acting upon such realization?

rk: This artificial issue of a "War on Terrorism" is a straw man created by your leadership to keep everyone misdirected and off-balance while America is being sold out to Corporate elitists of the NEW WORLD ORDER.

rk: Take back control of your country and your lives without firing a single shot in revolution.

rk: Read my articles on http://www.arkenterprises.com/dialchst.htm regarding the ONLY feasable solution to all of civilized man's problems. ONE SIMPLE ACT will bring down the HOUSE OF CARDS which is the SATANIC illusion which rules IGNORAMUSES.

rk: It does not require belief. It is merely a matter of breaking the spell of hypnotic mind control which presently binds your consciousness to a Hell of its own creation.

Mars www.swordofjustice.co.uk

Reply

Raymond Karczewski (arkent@arkenterprises.com) wrote:

27 Nov 2001 13:10:44 -0800

db: >> Does anyone know when the court date for Ray is? I would love to plan a little vacation to Oregon this season.

=======

s: > I cannot find any evidence that Raymond is in trouble with the law ... yet.

rk: That's because no such trouble exists -- that is, of course, unless our U.S. Constitution, the Supreme Law of the Land is suspended and Martial Law is declared.

rk: As long as the U.S. Constitution and Common Law Courts remain operant in our country, my Unalienable Rights and Constitutional Guarantees are all the protection I need in this issue.

rk: At the scene of the traffic stop, you may recall, I demanded to be arrested (one may read the articles and briefs regarding this issue at http://www.arkenterprises.com/dialchst.htm), but the officers REFUSED TO ARREST me for the vehicle code *infractions.* My mistake at the time was to not leave in my automobile when they refused to arrest me. Despite my objections, however, they impounded the "loaner" automobile and left me stranded in Canyonville, Oregon, eighty miles away from home.

rk: Presently, no warrant exists for my arrest for not signalling a right turn or, for that matter, having no operator's license at the time of the traffic stop as both issues are infractions and thereby not arrestable offenses. If I could not be arrested then, I cannot be arrested now.

rk: Since Canyonville Justice Court Justice of the Peace Carol Roberts refused to prove her Admiralty/Maritime Court's jurisdiction over me, a natural man demanding his Unalienable Right to Liberty, which includes travelling our highways in one's private property (automobile) for purposes of private transportation, and not being engaged in commerce, business or industry while using the highways for profit, along with her deprivation of my Constitutional Right to due process by refusing to bind the case over to a Common Law court for a jury trial, I regarded the justice court's decisions to be in conflict with the Supreme Law of the Land, the U.S. Constitution, and therefore its rulings lacked force of law and are null and void.

rk: I refused to submit to the traffic court's jurisidiction and to appear at a future date for a hearing before her court of no record. Below are cites provided to her by me in written briefs regarding the law on this issue. Judge Roberts refused to acknowledge them out of hand. In doing so she violated the law and her oath of office. An appeal of Judge Robert's decision would have run up my expenses in this case to $700+ just to have my day in court before a jury of my peers. Does not anyone find it a bit disconcerting that a free man must pay $700 to the state before he will have his case heard before the proper court of Jurisdiction and a jury of his peers?

rk: Following are the cites ignored by Justice of the Peace Carol Roberts of the Canyonville Justice Court:

rk: "Admiralty-Maritime courts have jurisdiction over contracts, torts, and other special cases." Waring v. Clark, 5 HOW 441m 454-464: Genesse Chief v. Fitzhugh, 12 HOW. 443. 454, United States v Flores, 289 U.S. 137, 154. (1933)

rk: "Once jurisdiction is challenged, it must be proven." HAGENS vs LAVINE, 15 U.S. 533 "No sanctions can be imposed absent proof of jurisdiction." Standard v. Olsen, 74 S. Ct. 768; Title 5 U.S.C., Sec. 556 and 558 (b). "Where there is absence of jurisdiction, all administrative and judicial proceedings are a nullity and confer no right, offer no protection, and afford no justification, and may be rejected upon direct collateral attack." Thompson v. Tolmie, 2 Pet. 157, 7 L.Ed. 381; Griffith v. Frazier, Cr. 9, 3L. Ed. 471. "The law provides that once State and Federal jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven." Main v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502 (1980).

and:

rk: Oregon Court Procedure rules regarding Motion to Dismiss ORCP 20.17 States: (20.17) *LACK OF JURISDICTION OVER SUBJECT MATTER* ORCP 21 A(1) allows dismissal of a claim for "lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter." "(I)f it appears by motion of the parties or otherwise that the court lacks jurisidiction over the subject matter, the court shall dismiss the action." ORCP 21 G(4) (emphasis added). Regardless of whether a defendant raises lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, the court has a duty on its own motion to refuse to proceed when the complaint fails to allege acts giving the court subject-matter jurisdiction. Greeninger vCromwell, 127 Or App 435, 438, 973 P2d 377 (1994)

rk: (20,20) *LACK OF JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON* ORCP 21 A(2) allows the dismissal of a claim for "lack of jurisdiction over the person." ORCP 21 permits the trial court to determine the facts relating to personal jurisdiction (and other enumerated ground) based on either the face of the pleadings or the factual material submitted to the court, Sutherland v. Brennan, 131 Or App 25, 28, 883 P2d 1318 (1994), aff'd, 321 Or 520 (1995); Industrial Leasing Corp. v. Miami Ice Machine Co., 126 Or App 80, 83- , 867 P2d 548 (1994)

rk: A subsequent letter was received from Oregon Dept. Motor Vehicles (DMV) dated 10-26-01 which stated: "We have received a notice under Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 809.290(2) from the court named below that you have not complied with fines or conditions set by the court pursuant to Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 809.410(24) Notice of Suspension of driving privileges to take effect at 12:01 AM on December 25 (Christmas) 2001."

rk: Note the language of 809.410 "Grounds for suspension and revocation; whether mandatory or permissive; duration." This section and ORS 813.400 and 813.403 (Suspension of commercial driver license upon conviction; review.) establish grounds for the suspension and revocation of driving privileges and commercial driver licenses by the Department of Transportation, whether the suspension or revocation is mandatory or permissive,

rk: Note that the language applies to the "Suspension of commercial driver license." I have never possessed a commercial driver license, let alone any license at all at the time of the Traffic Stop in question. So much for proper Jurisdiction, eh?

rk: Not only did I deliberately allow my Oregon Driver License to expire on September 23, 1999, I made public notification that I reasserted my Unalienable Rights to Liberty and had no intention of reapplying for an Oregon driver license.

rk: The remaining question the State of Oregon refuses to address is, how can it suspend the driving privileges of one who had no such contract for driving privileges and was not driving a "motor vehicle" for commercial purposes? Standing Legal definitions supported by case law have already established that one's private automobile is not a "MOTOR VEHICLE".

rk: Were I to be stopped today, November 27th, 2001, on a traffic stop or a roadblock, I WOULD NOT BE ARRESTED.

rk: Were I to be stopped on December 26th, 2001, the day after the State of Oregon's unlawful suspension of drivers privileges of a freeman who has not made such a contract with the State, law enforcement officers relying upon computer records would arrest me on the spot. That is where the TROUBLE shall arise, and unless Our Constitution is suspended, the TROUBLE will be the State of Oregon's in the Appellate and Civil Courts.

rk: It has been written before, but it bears repeating: Our country was founded upon such Unalienable Rights. What the Creator has granted, goverments cannot take away. Unalienable/Inalienable = "incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred." These God-given rights cannot be abridged, infringed upon, surrendered, transferred, converted, or legislated out of existence, nor can they be converted into privilege by man's law unless they are waived by contract.

s: > But I would suppose that, living in Oregon, as he has indicated, and driving without a license, as he has admitted on the public internet, could make him an attractive target for a cop who wants an easy bust.

snip:

s: > I can find only one previous court case in which someone tried to use the Declaration of Independence to argue that he had the "right" to drive a car without any license/registration/inspection, and that decision was unpublished in the conventional reporters altho it appears on WestLaw and Lexis; State v. Brunton (Wisc.App. 7/3/97) 212 Wis.2d 643 (table), 570 N.W.2d 63 (table). TO quote the decision: "And while he cites to us dozens of cases and texts, as well as the Declaration of Independence, in support of his argument [that he has 'an inalienable and constitutional right' to drive a motor vehicle on public roads despite revocation of his license], he refers us to no authority in Wisconsin or elsewhere holding that the state cannot validly enact laws requiring licensing of drivers and penalizing their violation."

rk: Your cite is irrelevant to the issue. I had no driver license to *suspend*, and I was not operating a *MOTOR VEHICLE.*

(See AUTOMOBILE AND MOTOR VEHICLE.)

rk: There is a clear distinction between an automobile and a motor vehicle. An automobile has been defined as:

rk:The word `automobile' connotes a pleasure vehicle designed for the transportation of persons on highways." American Mutual Liability Ins. Co., vs. Chaput, 60 A.2d 118, 120; 95 NH 200.

rk: While the distinction is made clear between the two as the courts have stated:

rk: "A motor vehicle or automobile for hire is a motor vehicle, other than an automobile stage, used for the transportation of persons for which remuneration is received." International Motor Transit Co. vs. Seattle, 251 P. 120.

rk: The distinction is made very clear in Title 18 USC 31:

rk: "Motor vehicle" means every description or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, or passengers and property."

rk: "Used for commercial purposes" means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other considerations, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit. "

rk: Clearly, an automobile is private property in use for private purposes, while a motor vehicle is a machine which may be used upon the highways for trade, commerce, or hire.

s: > I had read a good deal about the American Revolution but until I read Raymond's stuff I was not aware that the Declaration of Independence was written and the Revolutionary War was fought so that Ben Franklin could floor his Duesenberg in a residential area and without wearing his bifocals.

s: > In EVERY state of the Union the courts have made clear - and the US Supreme Court has made clear - that the states have not only the option, but the duty, to keep the highways safe by limiting highway usages to motorists and to vehicles who have demonstrably (and recently) demonstrated a fitness to be on the highways.

rk: It applies to commercial motor vehicles and their drivers and to the private automobiles and to the corporate persons who waive their Rights in favor of securing a privilege through contract. They do not apply to a natural person asserting his Unalienable Right to Liberty.

s: > NO court, anywhere in the US, has ever supported Raymond's argument, and a good many of the litigants trying to offer such arguments won free room and board for their efforts.

s: > It may seem unusual that until the last century there were virtually no highway laws and no drivers licenses.

rk: Highway Laws and driver's licenses are the progeny of the Insurance Industry who lobbied government for such laws in their ongoing attempt to hold down costs and increase profits.

s: > This is the result of the invention of the horseless carriage. There were, after all, limits to what risky things a horse (or donkey or ox, etc.) would do, no matter how stupid, drunk or blind the human holding the reins was. You hardly ever heard of a horse trying to run up a tree. But eliminating the horse meant subtracting half (at least) of the brains involved in controlling a vehicle which otherwise had no instinct for self-preservation. That's the reason that highway laws became necessary.

rk: Your disinformation misdirections in this and prior articles have been duly noted -- at least by me. I wonder how many others have seen them for what they are?

1cc Hardy Myers, Oregon Attorney General hardy.myers@state.or.us

1cc Clay Johnson, District Attorney Josephine County Oregon da@co.josephine.or.us

1cc Dave Daniel, Sheriff, Josephine County Oregon DDANIEL@co.josephine.or.us

Reply

"David bartholomew" (david@bartholomew.com) wrote:

"Raymond Karczewski" (arkent@arkenterprises.com) wrote in message news:c0588d7a.0111271908.8d87943@posting.google.com...

rk: >> At the scene of the traffic stop, you may recall, I demanded to be arrested (one may read the articles and briefs regarding this issue at http://www.arkenterprises.com/dialchst.htm), but the officers REFUSED TO ARREST me for the vehicle code *infractions.* My mistake at the time was to not leave in my automobile when they refused to arrest me. Despite my objections, however, they impounded the rental automobile and left me stranded in Canyonville, Oregon, eighty miles away from home.

db: and later on he wrote...

rk: >> Your cite is irrelevant to the issue. I had no driver license to *suspend*, and I was not operating a *MOTOR VEHICLE.* (See AUTOMOBILE AND MOTOR VEHICLE.)

rk: >> There is a clear distinction between an automobile and a motor vehicle. An automobile has been defined as:

rk: >> "The word `automobile' connotes a pleasure vehicle designed for the transportation of persons on highways." American Mutual Liability Ins. Co., vs. Chaput, 60 A.2d 118, 120; 95 NH 200.

rk: >> While the distinction is made clear between the two as the courts have stated:

rk: >> "A motor vehicle or automobile for hire is a motor vehicle, other than an automobile stage, used for the transportation of persons for which remuneration is received." International Motor Transit Co. vs. Seattle, 251 P. 120.

rk: >> The distinction is made very clear in Title 18 USC 31:

rk: >> "Motor vehicle" means every description or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, or passengers and property."

db: > uh, excuse me, but is not a RENTAL VEHICLE a vehicle for hire for commercial purposes? In other words, you WERE operating a commercial vehicle.

rk: I mis-spoke. It was not a *rental vehicle* as stated in the original article, but a *loaner auto* from my dealership for my personal use while my automobile was being serviced.

Reply

Raymond Karczewski (arkent@arkenterprises.com) wrote:

29 Nov 2001 17:26:50 GMT

cg: I still see no counter-argument to my simple point that all the driver 'licensing' involved is nothing more than a way to properly identify and assure that only safe drivers are operating heavy machinery (automobiles or other) on our public roads.

rk: Why continue baiting another into argument when the other only mirrors the confusion which exists in your own consciousness?

cg: Is there no response to the simple idea that my inalienable right to safety is at least as important as someone else's inalienable right to free movement?

rk: I see by your email address you are posting from a Canadian ISP, yet in your first paragraph you refer to "our public roads." Are you Canadian or American? If American, why post from a foreign country? If Canadian, why speculate about the "Unalienable Rights" guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution to a populace of which you are not a part. Is that not a bit disingenuous on your part?

rk: Such protection is addressed in common law.

rk: But therein lies the rub for Satanic (Opposer) driven "argument mongers" such as yourself. In Common Law, protection of the *natural* person rights is tied to the actual damage caused. When no actual damage exists, there is no crime.

rk: That is not the case with Admiralty-Maritime courts which have jurisdiction over contracts, torts, and other special cases. Waring v. Clark, 5 HOW 441m 454-464: Genesse Chief v. Fitzhugh, 12 HOW. 443. 454, United States v Flores, 289 U.S. 137, 154. (1933)

rk: *Corporate* persons are governed by *Statute* by their own *consent* and/or by the waiving, knowingly or unknowingly, of their Unalienable Rights in lieu of privilege through a licensing Contract with the State.

cg: That the laws and regulations and 'licenses' of society are intended to strike a balance between these different rights when the two are in conflict?

rk: When no contract exists with the State, which establishes Admiralty/Maritime jurisdiction, Common Law and the U.S. Constitution prevail - have primary jurisdiction.

cg: No comment on the idea that 'free use of the roads' does not necessarily mean control of the vehicle, but only that you may freely *ride* in one?

rk: You play with words. I suggest you inform yourself further by studying the legal definitions of "driving," "operating," and "travelling" before you seek to engage another in such blatant misdirecting, disinformation, and ambush tactics.

rk: Such tactics belie a lack of integrity, do they not?

The following libelous attacks arise from the keyboards of assorted anonymous government/media disinformation agents who through disruption, intimidation, and character assassination control the flow of information on public Usenet Newsgroups/Forums

You, RAYMONDO, are a certified blithering

Re: The State of Oregon's Suspension of Unalienable Rights (Raymond Karczewski)

Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 03:44:04 GMT

From: PHOOLE detector (unknown)

psychotic, deranged MADMAN. You waste your life and time with trivial tripe, my man. Find a real life somewhere. Get off your guardhouse lawyer hobby horse. You are making a big public PHOOLE of yourself.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

O for God's sake

Re: Ramblin Ray=lawyer bait (Bert)

Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 14:19:45 GMT

From: This is completely beside the point! (unknown)

That is completely beside the point! Ray is openly delusional in the way he fundamentally cannot understand the law, and in his belief evil, invisible cops busted him! There is precisely no basis for his infantile claim that he can drive dangerous vehicles on public roads with impunity without demonstrating that his wild mental illness does not pose a real threat to innocent parties. He even claims there was no one on the road when he broke the law, despite the fact he did get busted by people pointedly on the road when he broke the law! Whatever problems you're having with lawyers, they have nothing at all to do with Ray's painful psychiatric problems, and ongoing waste of taxpayer moneys because he refuses to act like an adult and be accountable for his own criminal actions.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You are STILL misrpresenting those cases' holdings

Re: The State of Oregon's Suspension of Unalienable Rights (Raymond Karczewski)

Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 12:27:17 GMT

From: YOUR CONSTANT FRAUD REEKS (unknown)

Just shows how completely bankrupt you are that you are forced to lie about the holding of cases because if you told the truth even you couldn't deny your liability. All questions of obvious psychosis aside, YOUR CONSTANT FRAUD REEKS!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

No, Ray just can't understand them is all

Re: You are STILL misrpresenting those cases' holdings (YOUR CONSTANT FRAUD REEKS)

Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 14:21:55 GMT

From: He's mentally ill and uneducated (unknown)

I'm conviced Ray is just to mentally ill to understand basic legal concepts and his own dysfunctional behavior. It's not so much a question of lying, but of acting out on his psychosis.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So what is it with you people?

Re: Response to Raymond Karczewski's bogus legal claims (Charles Gregory)

Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 23:27:41 GMT

From: He thinks invisible cops are after him! (unknown)

This guy Ray is obviously, painfully sick. He has been told his grasp of the law is non-existent, his legal problems have been explained dozens of times to him, but he has been arguing his car is a boat for at least 1/2 year now, and still thinks invisible cops busted him against his constitutional rights. Do you think anyone who thinks his car is a boat and that invisible cops are persecuting him is ever going to listen to law or reason? What exactly is the point behind all this?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

STUPID BEYOND BELIEF

Re: State of Oregon's Suspension of Unalienable Rights (Raymond Karczewski)

Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 21:44:26 GMT

From: No wonder you never got past high scool (unknown)

You can repeat these same stupid mistakes and ancient, inapposite case law until you drop dead. None of that will ever actually be real. You are a criminal, have had repeated legal problems for excellent reasons, and are just too stupid and infantile to acknowledge when you're dead wrong. This is why you never got past high school in your education. You are not only stupid beyond belief, but are too weak emotionally to be willing to acknowledge you are not sufficiently intelligent to grasp basic legal concepts.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

No cars at all in any of the case law Ray?

Re: Explanation of your basic errors in logic and law (sussmanbern)

Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 22:16:19 GMT

From: What kind of bonehead are you anyway (unknown)

Steamboats? Ships? 19th century superceded maritime law? And you think you're going somewhere with such a pathetic display of ignorance and aggression? Exactly what kind of bonehead are you anyway man? Pay society the money damages you owe us you criminal and shut the hell up already.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hey Ray: a car is not a boat! Got it?????

Re: State of Oregon's Suspension of Unalienable Rights (Raymond Karczewski)

Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 22:04:56 GMT

From: Admiralty relates to maritime/sea law! (unknown)

First, admiralty law relates to vessels at sea, not to cars on Oregon public roads. You CAN tell the difference between a road and the sea, can't you Ray? Second, no local traffic court has admiralty jurisdiction. Read the Constitution for Christ's sake man. Third, HOT DAMN YOU ARE A CRAZY F**KING BASTARD!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kind of makes you wonder about Ray's family

Re: Are these people related to you? (How do guys like you get this sickanyway)

Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 22:42:05 GMT

From: Is the whole family this diseased? (unknown)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You're QUITE the victim, aren't you Ray?

Re: The State of Oregon's Suspension of Unalienable Rights (Raymond Karczewski)

Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 12:51:10 GMT

From: You must be & feel completely impotent (unknown)

I wonder if there's any there in you there once you take away this overwrought fantasy of your own victimization by the whole of existence? This may be one of the most overblown elaborations of victim logic I've ever seen. What satisfaction exactly do you get out of basing your entire self-worth on delusions you are society's greatest victim? Why not strive to actually accomplish something in life, as opposed to living off our tax money, screeching here constantly about how people won't give you everything you want, and whining publicly about every two-bit problem that crops up in your pathetic little life?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Leave it to this KOOOOK

Re: The State of Oregon's Suspension of Unalienable Rights (Raymond Karczewski)

Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 13:16:54 GMT

From: Why not spam it to the White House KOOK? (unknown)

to spam this massive display of mental ilness to the legal authorities he claims are victimizing him. Afetr all the deranged harassment Ray's put them through, he must be completely whacked to imagine anyone is sympathetic to his violence and aggression.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Nah. Everything this guy posts is a lie

Re: Leave it to this KOOOOK (Why not spam it to the White House KOOK?)

Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 13:59:47 GMT

From: This "cc" stuff is fraudulent too (unknown)

You forgot:"De minimis non curat lex" It means: Re: The State of Oregon's Suspension of Unalienable Rights (Raymond Karczewski) Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 06:00:56 GMT From: Hal (unknown) The law does not concern itself with trifles. That is what you have here. And that is why you get no where with your argument that you are a freeman" able to drive without license.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Better read than listening to you pretentious drone

Re: The United States of America Declaration of Independence (Raymond Karczewski)

Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 01:39:22 GMT

From: Your hypocrisy defiles it (unknown)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So now you want

Re: The United States of America Declaration of Independence (Raymond Karczewski)

Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 01:51:45 GMT

From: Your voice is hollow and corrupt (unknown)

credit for reading the words OTHER men wrote, lived by, died for, and be somehow associated with those great men because you pronounce their syllables? Forget it. Your voice is hollow and corrupt. Live by the words or don't say them at all.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So get a job & live independent, OFF OUR TAX MONEY!

Re: The United States of America Declaration of Independence (Raymond Karczewski)

Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 02:43:58 GMT

From: Hard-working taxpayer (unknown)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Uh, Ray, the Declaration became meaningless after

Re: The United States of America Declaration of Independence (Raymond Karczewski)

Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 03:54:16 GMT

From: we beat the Brits & made a Constitution (unknown)

Reply

Next Page

Return to Home Page