Mike, didn't see your post til now sunday so I don't know if you'll see this but I wonder, as it's been awhile for me, if the fact that the individual not being aware, as he was never told, that he was waiving constitutional common law rights has ever cropped up in your experience as a defense for ridding oneself of the SS number. I am aware of cases, some have been won, which has opened up other battles with government over licensed business activities, by claiming the SS number is the mark of the beast based on the right to freedom of conscious based on religious belief and people want out of the contract. Even after these victories, some taking years, the government never lets up. The reason I ask if you've heard anything on the deception by not informing tactic nullifying the contract is because I thought I'd heard somewhere the government had shut off that avenue of redress by claiming ignorance of the law was no excuse and that it was not governments "job" to inform you that you were waiving your rights by signing the contract. Any thoughts?

"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters." Benjamin Franklin

The false foundation he refers to in our day are the laws of commerce foreign to the jurisdiction of the common law that we are all under due to our voluntary consensual signatures on contracts (social security being the main one of hundreds) that places us under the foreign jurisdiction of commerce laws. When we sign those contracts we waive our constitutional rights in lieu of rights that are called privileges that are granted by the foreign to the Constitution government that oversees commercial jurisdiction. In truth, we have been suckered into placing common law jurisdiction secondary to this corporate jurisdiction. Excellent quote.

We are all, by nature and the will of what is right that respects the natural rights of every individual life, peace keepers. Citizen's arrest anyone?

Wait Waff, the next round of profit taking and nation breaking is yet to come. The ignorant are being sucked into compacency again and it's obvious you've bought into the facade too. The winners this time will be the same winners as last time. The one worlders who used the economic debacle to further centralize their power. All in a days work.

J Carlton, I agree but the problem is the president, whoever he might be, has his own set of laws called executive order, privilege and immunity. Sounds like a tyrant to me but most think those powers are for everybody's own good while the pres laughs all the way to the bank. One things for sure, one day they will know the truth and I don't think it'll be the same truth that sets one free.

That's the problem today, Americans have been first taught that charity is good which in pure form is, it's just that they believe, again by being taught, that our administrations are responsible to dish it out and that any American who disagrees is a selfish bastard. The selfish bastard is now the subversive.

J Carlton, interesting stats indeed and it also kind of indicates what Canadians think of their own health care. Not such good thoughts I would think.

Waffler.........."Those that know how to think need no teachers." Gandhi

J Carlton, been there and done that and I sure hope many many more will be able to say the same thing some day. An excellent and superb video and nothing is more eye opening and convincing than when Aaron finally gets his interview with the ex-director of the I.R.S. The contempt he shows for Aaron should be taken personally by every American who watches the video.

Seeing it today as the other side of the coin in the hands of the elite few he wouldn't say that now. Rushed Waffler? I don't think so because 20 years of hearing the arguments and researching the difference between the 2 is not rushed. As has been said before, you just don't want to upset the status quo which you are obviously a benificiary of.

For a long time I've been of the opinion that it is the respect of fundamental natural rights of the individual that was and should be the first check on all of us as individuals and so that being true the first check on the actions of our form of self government administrations before they have any authority to make any decision or legislate any law. That is what they took and oath to do.

Couldn't say it any better Mike. I agree.

Regardless of who says it the truth is truth and it always stands on its own no matter who says it.

Well that says it all doesn't it?

Eccentricity is genius in action which most people don't see and so the conclusion an eccentric is not normal.

First they get mad at it and after the anger fades then they laugh at it so to have a reason for ignoring it.

It depends on what you add to it. If you add more truth to it you add to the total truth and subtract nothing but ignorance.

And thank the creator for this incontrovertible truth.

Therein lies the question, the inconvenience of freedom vs the inconvenience of slavery. Which one is desired and which one is chosen by the individual is THE decision all will have to make eventually or put another way, choose your master.

Much better Mike. In opposite when we stand and protect our own rights we stand and protect the rights of all others.

To speak for and desire morality on a personal level these days is to be a religious zealot and to speak for and desire them again in practice by our administrations is to be a right wing nut aka extremist. Morals is a dirty word in modern society. You want to be good it's ok to be ethical but don't bring morals into it.

I believe all of this is covered in the Patriot Act isn't it? Homeland Security? Turn in those suspicious looking activities for the good of the country and since it's the prosperous USA we'll even pay you for the information.

Who hasn't seen somebody that's acted suspiciously at some time in their life? The problem arises when some begin to think that all activity is suspicious. Suspicion is born of fear or concern that something is not right. We suspect our government and watch their body language and facial expressions too to see if their a source of what's not right. The only difference is that we don't have a law against those activities and our government doesn't need a law to make the decision of whether a facecrime has been committed or not. They just do it anyway and if they need a crime to charge the facecrimer with they'll pick one and see the evidence appears backing it up. This goes back to the scapegoat quote prior to this one.

That's because it's double the pleasure when one knows the one suffering is supposed to be him. But that's ok because he's also convinced himself it is civilized behavior.