Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Ex Actions- Table of Authorities

Ex Actions- Table of Authorities

Ratings: (0)|Views: 18 |Likes:

More info:

Published by: solution4theinnocent on May 12, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Exactions – Table of Authorities
The inevitable conclusion arrived at by the inescapable logicin this simple illustration is intolerable and sickening.
Civil Rights Act. Equal Rights. Good, right? Wrong. As we know, here's what you get along withyour civil "equal" rights:Civil Rights Act of 1866CRA 42 U.S. Code 21 §§1981, 1981A, 1983, & 198842 USC CHAPTER 21CIVIL RIGHTS TITLE 42THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARECHAPTER 21CIVIL RIGHTSSec.1981.
Equal rights
the law
.1981a. Damages in cases of intentional discrimination in employment1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights.1988. Proceedings in vindication of civil rights.Sec. 1981. Equal rights
the law(a) Statement of equal rightsAll
within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same
in every Stateand Territory
to make and enforce contracts
, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full andequal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property
as is enjoyed by
citizens, and shall
be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties,
taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind 
and to no other
 Gee, thanks, but no thanks. You can go stick your civil equal right to being unlawfully subjected totaxes, licenses and
exactions of every kind 
. Jeez, I know freedom isn't free but this is ridiculous. Iread once that ALL taxes are EXACTIONS. Now, exactions, that's something we should learnmore about. I wanted to know EXACT-ly what this "term of art" means as used in the Civil RightsAct. Wasn't hard to find and I see no need to go any further than this:
 A willful wrong done by an officer, or by one who, under color of hisoffice
, takes more fee or pay for his services than what the law allows. Between extortion andexaction there is this difference; that in the former case the officer extorts more than his due, when
Table of Authorities – Exactions – Compiled by Michael James Anthony – Page 1
something is due to him; in the latter, he
exacts what is not his due, when there is nothing due tohim
. Wishard; Co. Litt. 368. From: A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier. Published 1856.So the civil rights act above
tells you flat out 
that all persons, black and white, will be subjectingthemselves, by 14th amendment US citizenship, to exactions, the next best thing to extortion! So,as the Act proclaims, those "rights" (subjections) are "granted" (imposed) when you are
under thelaw.
Then, the "exactor" exacts, or extracts, i.e., TAKES "what is not his due, when there isnothing due to him."Webster was familiar with the concept in 1828 and in 1913:
, n. The act of demanding with authority, and compelling to pay or yield;authoritative demand; a levying or drawing from
by force
; a driving to compliance; as the exactionof tribute or of obedience.1. Extortion; a wresting from one unjustly;
the taking advantage of one's necessities
, tocompel him to pay illegal or exorbitant tribute, fees or rewards.Take away your exactions from my people. Ezek.45.Daily new
are devised.
of sheriffs and officials.
2. That which is exacted; tribute, fees, rewards or contributions demanded or levied withseverity or injustice.
Kings may be enriched by exactions, but their power is weakened by the consequent disaffection of their subjects.Thank you, Noah! So if it pisses off the subjects, what are Citizens supposed to think? I know theremay not be a difference, so what should we sovereigns without subjects think; what should we menand women think?
The excessive or unauthorized taking or collection of moneys as fees or dues by anofficer or by a person pretending to be an officer. An excessive demand. An amount demandedand taken without right. See Extortion. –Ballentine’s Law Dictionary, 3
edition.Modern definitions agree:
act of demanding and obtaining something:
the act of 
somebody to give something,especially
unfair demand:
unfair or excessive
demand for something, especially
( formal )
Table of Authorities – Exactions – Compiled by Michael James Anthony – Page 2
payment obtained by force:
a sum of 
that has been
 forcibly demanded and obtained 
( formal )This is the very nature of the alleged income tax and property tax, among others, not to mentioneach and every fee and fine, and every other "payment" you make to the exactors; and, since, infact and law, nothing is due, you are being subjected to an unlawful debt by a "counterfeitedsecurity" (they are uttering evidence of indebtedness unlawfully) and you pay or you go to jail or you die. They're crooks, self-admitted. It's racketeering at its boldest. No conspiracy necessary, justthe implementation of these policies
vi et armis
, by force and arms.In fact, the definitions other than Bouvier's Law Dictionary make no mention of whether anythingis actually "due" or not. Even if,
certain payments were due, the point is that the amountof the payments are unfair, excessive, and demanded and obtained by force -- unjustly! Tributesand obedience! Taking advantage of our necessities! This explains the price of gas and of food andof other "necessities."I would say that any imposition of the taxes, licenses and exactions of every kind (and they surecome up with some doozies) pursuant to the Civil Rights Act (all "Acts" move in commerce only)qualify, by definition, as criminal acts--torts. Of course, as we also know, silence equals consent,and consent comes in many other forms as well. I remember that Rousseau's theory of nogovernment without consent also meant that if you don't consent you will be forced to consent toexist in society. That is no consent but coercion. Here's a commentary on Locke's ideas in contrastto Rousseau, and the excerpt from Rousseau's Social Contract.
Tacit Consent
The theory of an implicit social contract holds that by remaining in the territory controlled by somegovernment, people give consent to be governed. This consent is what gives legitimacy to thegovernment. Philosopher Roderick Longargues that this is a case of question begging, because the argument has to presuppose its conclusion:I think that the person who makes this argument is already assuming that the governmenthas some legitimate jurisdiction over this territory. And then they say, well, now, anyonewho is in the territory is therefore agreeing to the prevailing rules. But they’re assuming thevery thing they're trying to prove – namely that this jurisdiction over the territory islegitimate. If it's not, then the government is just one more group of people living in this broad general geographical territory. But I've got my property, and exactly what their arrangements are I don't know, but here I am in my property and they don't own it – at leastthey haven't given me any argument that they do – and so, the fact that I am living in "thiscountry" means I am living in a certain geographical region that they have certain pretensions over but the question is whether those pretensions are legitimate. You can’tassume it as a means to proving it.[9]An answer to this argument is that a society which has effective dominion over a territory, that is, astate, is thesovereignover that territory, and therefore the true, legal
of all of it. This isactually the theory of law for real propertyin every country.
What individuals can own is not theland itself, but an estate in the land, that is, a transferrable right
to use and exclude others
Table of Authorities – Exactions – Compiled by Michael James Anthony – Page 3

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->