Third or fourth arson this week in Spring City TN... While speaking to local residents, State Forest Service employees admitted setting at least two of the fires, including burning down a vacant house in Wolf Creek "for training purposes". Notice how the corporate news reports them as accidental "wildfires under investigation" for arson...
The majority of the latest forest fire was a controlled-burn backfire, that burned 100s of acres owned by the political Van Hilleary family, nearly burning down their abandoned mansion. Insurance claim?
The toothless firebugs at the Forest Service "forgot" to tell area 911 Dispatch, Police, Sheriff, Fire Departments, news repeaters and terrorized residents that this was an intentional "controlled-burn"... Notice how firemen don't carry fire extinguishing equipment, only flamethrowers:
UPDATE:
Devil dog hanged with a dog leash near the latest fire...
Blair Witch haunting the old Van Hillary mansion...in Hell!
Author: Michael Reneau Source: Rhea Herald-News 02/22/2011
Firefighters have been battling wild fires near Grandview Mountain for several days, and local law enforcement is investigating the cause of those fires.
Tennessee Forestry Division Technician Russell Roberts said Tuesday that his agency is battling a 125-acre fire that spans from the Cawood Road area west to Possum Trot Road at the foot of Grandview Mountain.
He said the blaze is proving tricky in that no roads give firemen access to the blaze. Roberts said even bulldozers are having a hard time reaching the fire.
To fight brush fires forestry agents clear trees and underbrush around the fire, leaving nothing to burn so the fire will snuff itself out.
As of Tuesday afternoon the blaze was about 100 feet away from any houses, which Roberts said was a fairly safe distance.
Roberts and other forestry technicians fought a 55-acre fire at the end of last week near Highway 68 in the Grandview area as well. It took them two days to extinguish that blaze. Roberts said the nooks and crannies near the ridgeline complicate the firefighting.
"When you get in these mountains you've got all these bluff lines," he said.
Roberts said brush fires usually crop up in early spring, but these fires are two-to-three weeks early, he said.
"We just need to catch up on our rainfall levels," he said.
County firefighters have been on hand as back up. Assistant Rhea County Fire Chief Chuck Kinney said county firefighters primarily provide backup but step up when buildings are in danger.
Rhea County Chief Deputy John Argo said the sheriff's department is investigating the cause of the fires and suspects it may be arson.
"We're checking in to see what we can find out," he said.
Michael Reneau can be contacted at michael.reneau@rheaheraldnews.com.
Fair use for non-commercial news commentary and archive cache per 17 US Code 107.
Blair Witch Michael Vick forest fire arson pyromania pyromaniac Vietnam War kill dog torture Wiccan Satanic Satanism Molech Bohemian Grove RSPCA PETA dog fighting animal cruelty
by REP. RON PAUL MD Winner of the 2012 and 2008 CPAC Presidential Poll
In 2002 I asked my House colleagues a rhetorical question with regard to the onslaught of government growth in the post-September 11th era: Is America becoming a police state?
The question is no longer rhetorical. We are not yet living in a total police state, but it is fast approaching.
The seeds of future tyranny have been sown, and many of our basic protections against government have been undermined. The atmosphere since 2001 has permitted Congress to create whole new departments and agencies that purport to make us safer- always at the expense of our liberty. But security and liberty go hand-in-hand.
Members of Congress, like too many Americans, don't understand that a society with no constraints on its government cannot be secure. History proves that societies crumble when their governments become more powerful than the people and private institutions.
Unfortunately, the new intelligence bill passed by Congress two weeks ago moves us closer to an encroaching police state by imposing the precursor to a full-fledged national ID card.
Within two years, every American will need a "conforming ID to deal with any federal agency -- including TSA at the airport. Undoubtedly many Americans and members of Congress don't believe America is becoming a police state, which is reasonable enough. They associate the phrase with highly visible symbols of authoritarianism like military patrols, martial law, and summary executions.
But we ought to be concerned that we have laid the foundation for tyranny by making the public more docile, more accustomed to government bullying, and more accepting of arbitrary authority -- all in the name of security. Our love for liberty above all has been so diminished that we tolerate intrusions into our privacy that would have been abhorred just a few years ago.
We tolerate inconveniences and infringements upon our liberties in a manner that reflects poorly on our great national character of rugged individualism. American history, at least in part, is a history of people who don't like being told what to do. Yet we are increasingly empowering the federal government and its agents to run our lives.
Terror, fear, and crises like 9-11 are used to achieve complacency and obedience, especially when citizens are deluded into believing they are still a free people.
The loss of liberty, we are assured, will be minimal, short-lived, and necessary. Many citizens believe that once the war on terror is over, restrictions on their liberties will be reversed. But this war is undeclared and open-ended, with no precise enemy and no expressly stated final goal. Terrorism will never be eradicated completely; does this mean future presidents will assert extraordinary war powers indefinitely?
Washington DC provides a vivid illustration of what our future might look like. Visitors to Capitol Hill encounter police barricades, metal detectors, paramilitary officers carrying fully automatic rifles, police dogs, ID checks, and vehicle stops. The people are totally disarmed; only the police and criminals have guns.
Surveillance cameras are everywhere, monitoring street activity, subway travel, parks, and federal buildings. There's not much evidence of an open society in Washington, DC, yet most folks do not complain -- anything goes if it's for government-provided safety and security.
After all, proponents argue, the government is doing all this to catch the bad guys. If you don't have anything to hide, they ask, what are you so afraid of?
The answer is that I'm afraid of losing the last vestiges of privacy that a free society should hold dear.
I'm afraid of creating a society where the burden is on citizens to prove their innocence, rather than on government to prove wrongdoing.
Most of all, I'm afraid of living in a society where a subservient populace surrenders its liberties to an all-powerful government.
It may be true that average Americans do not feel intimidated by the encroachment of the police state. Americans remain tolerant of what they see as mere nuisances because they have been deluded into believing total government supervision is necessary and helpful, and because they still enjoy a high level of material comfort.
That tolerance may wane, however, as our standard of living falls due to spiraling debt, endless deficit spending at home and abroad, a declining fiat dollar, inflation, higher interest rates, and failing entitlement programs. At that point attitudes toward omnipotent government may change, but the trend toward authoritarianism will be difficult to reverse.
Those who believe a police state can't happen here are poor students of history.
Every government, democratic or not, is capable of tyranny.
We must understand this if we hope to remain a free people.
Holy fucking shit! Now that's what I call knocking the heads off Gangsta Govt.
This sounds a lot like the Clifford Clark case in Knoxville TN, driving with a legal unloaded rifle seized by an illegal search of his vehicle, thousands in property illegally stolen by police, "terrorist" charges invented out of thin air, police destroyed all evidence in the case, all charges dismissed after cops confessed to shooting the red-light camera, and the foreign camera contractor fired for "suspected bribery and contract fraud".
This case is a frightening example of what can happen when a photographer encounters ignorant bullies with badges. According to the complaint filed in Federal Court, Nancy Genovese, a mother of three, was driving home on County Road 31 past Gabreski Airport in Suffolk County. Gabreski Airport displays a decorative helicopter shell by the roadway to the public, which is visible to all who pass by.
Nancy Genovese stopped her car on the side of the road across the street from the airport in an area that is open and accessible to the public, and crossed over the road to the airport entryway that is also open and accessible to the public to take a picture of the helicopter display. While still in her car, she took a picture of the decorative helicopter shell with the intention of posting it on her personal “Support Our Troops” web page.
As Nancy Genovese was preparing to drive away, she was stopped and approached by Robert Iberger, a lieutenant with the Southampton Town Police. Lieutenant Iberger demanded to know why she was taking photographs. Nancy showed the lieutenant her camera, but Lieutenant Iberger grabbed her camera and handled it “without care”. In an attempt to prevent the lieutenant from damaging the camera, Nancy removed her memory card, which Lieutenant Iberger confiscated. To date, Nancy’s memory card still has not been returned to her.
Lieutenant Iberger demanded that Nancy remain where she is, and he refused to allow her to leave. At this time, Lieutenant Iberger notified the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Office and the authorities at Gabreski Airport of Nancy’s presence outside the airport, and falsely and wrongfully informed them that she posed a terrorist threat.
Suffolk County Deputy Sheriff Robert Carlock responded to the scene, along with various members of the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Office. When Deputy Carlock arrived, he placed cameras on the roof of his vehicle, aimed at Nancy Genovese and her 18 and 20 year old sons who had come to the scene at this point to help their mother. Deputy Carlock ordered all three of them to stand directly in front of the cameras, and not to move.
Officials from the airport, as well as other local and federal law enforcement agencies also responded, including, without limitation, the Southampton Police Department, the Westhampton Police Department, the FBI, and the Department of Homeland Security. Nancy was questioned on the side of the road for approximately five to six hours, from about 6pm until midnight, denied food or water, and denied the opportunity to use a restroom, all without having received any warnings as to her rights.
Nancy Genovese also had a left lower leg injury just above her ankle that she had received earlier in the day and which, exacerbated by the stress and length of her roadside detention, was causing her to limp. When the officers saw this, they ordered her to expose her wound, which was bleeding, for no legitimate purpose, and with no regard for Nancy’s health or well-being. Members of the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Office used Nancy’s leg wound as another object to taunt her with, telling her that they were going to arrest her for an unreported knife wound.
Here’s where the story takes an interesting twist, and why I believe Nancy’s situation hasn’t received more press coverage. Before arriving at the airport to take a picture, earlier that day Nancy had been to the local shooting range with her rifle practicing her hobby, target shooting. During the first hour of questioning, Lieutenant Iberger searched Nancy’s vehicle, without her consent, and came across her unloaded rifle, which Nancy was legally carrying, in a locked case. Now some people throw up their arms (no pun intended) at this point, and say, “what does she want, she brought a rifle to the airport!”, but I would like to remind everyone that it is perfectly legal to drive around with an unloaded rifle in your car. Yes. Really. And Nancy did not enter the airport, she was parked alongside a public roadway. It is important to remember that no matter how you feel about firearms, nothing that Nancy did violated any laws.
Using force, Lieutenant Iberger pushed Nancy Genovese when she objected to the seizure of her rifle. Deputy Carlock taunted Nancy, asking in a disparaging tone, “You’re a real right winger, aren’t you?”, and stating in words or substance that she was never going to see her rifle again.
During the remainder of the six hours that Nancy Genovese was forcibly detained on the side of the road, she was taunted, verbally harangued, threatened, belittled, abused, humiliated and harassed by members of the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Office. For example, Deputy Carlock repeatedly referred to Nancy as “a right winger” and “tea bagger”, and threatened that they were going to arrest her for terrorism to make an example of her to other “tea baggers” and “right wingers”.
Around midnight, officials from the airport and federal law enforcement agencies determined that Nancy posed no terrorist or other security threat. Once most of the other law enforcement officials left the scene, Deputy Carlock ordered Nancy Genovese to be handcuffed by another member of the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Office. Before placed in handcuffs, Nancy attempted to give her purse containing her wallet and cell phone to her sons. Her wallet contained approximately $13,000 in cash, money she was holding to pay tuition that day for her son’s college and her daughter’s Catholic school tuition. Deputy Carlock refused to allow her sons to take her bag, and ordered her to leave it on the front seat of her unlocked vehicle, even after being informed of the value of its contents. When Nancy’s sons objected, Deputy Carlock threatened to arrest them if they touched it, and ordered them to leave the scene. Not knowing what to do, they left.
When Nancy’s sons responded to a call from the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Office in the early morning hours to pick up their mother’s vehicle from the roadside, they found $5,300 of the $13,000 missing. The money was never returned. In addition, the contents of the glove compartment box was missing, and there was damage to the body of the car, particularly around the trunk.
Around midnight, after her sons were ordered to leave upon threat of arrest, Nancy was transported, in handcuffs, to the Suffolk County Jail. While in a holding cell, Deputy Carlock continued to verbally harass Nancy, telling her “you will pay”, and admitting that they had nothing to charge her with, but that he would “find something in order to teach all right wingers and tea baggers a lesson.”
While in her holding cell, Nancy Genovese was interrogated by Suffolk County Undersheriff Caracappa without receiving any warnings as to her rights. Her requests to speak to a lawyer were ignored. Following her “interrogation”, Undersheriff Caracappa informed her that she was being arrested and charged with “terrorism.”
At this point, Nancy requested medial treatment for her bleeding and painful left leg. After several requests, and several hours later, she was taken to the Peconic Bay Medical Center by male members of the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Office, and handcuffed to a bed. A sonogram was performed on Nancy’s left leg from her ankle to her inner groin, requiring her to disrobe. Despite her and the doctor’s request for them to turn away, the two male Suffolk Deputies insisted on staring at Nancy while she disrobed, further humiliating her. She was prescribed antibiotics, and discharged back to the Suffolk County Jail, with instructions on proper care for her leg wound.
Once back at the jail, the Suffolk County Sheriffs denied her access to her antibiotics, and denied her proper care of her leg wound. This caused a serious and painful staph infection to develop.
The following morning, Nancy Genovese was briefly questioned at the Suffolk County Jail by two FBI agents. No federal complaints or charges were ever brought against Nancy. That same day, Nancy was transported in handcuffs and ankle shackles, with no regard for her ankle wound, to the Southampton Justice Town Court. The driver drove fast and recklessly, intentionally making abrupt turns and laughing. This caused Nancy, who was not secured by a seatbelt, but was instead restrained with her hands cuffed behind her and her ankles cuffed together, to roll about in the back of the vehicle, further exacerbating her leg injury. When she requested that the Deputy Sheriffs secure her with a seatbelt, they laughed at her, and the driver continued to recklessly swerve the vehicle.
Nancy Genovese was brought into the courthouse in handcuffs and leg restraints, and was violently pushed through the door by the Deputy Sheriffs. This added to Nancy’s humiliation, particularly since Nancy knew some of the courthouse employees and other people who were present. Both before and after arriving at the courthouse, Nancy repeatedly requested to speak with an attorney. All of her requests were ignored.
Despite never stepping foot onto airport property, Nancy Genovese was arraigned on a single misdemeanor charge of Criminal Trespass in the Third Degree. She was assigned a Legal Aid Attorney by the Judge. Undersheriff Caracappa and Deputy Carlock intentionally lied to the Judge about the circumstances surrounding Nancy’s arrest, including that she was a terrorist and had surveillance equipment in her car, and the judge set bail in the amount of $50,000.
Due to the excessive amount of bail, Nancy’s children needed more time to come up with the money, so Nancy was returned to the jail. The Legal Aid Attorney assigned to Nancy spoke with the Deputy and Undersheriff, and due to the conversation, directly afterwards informed Nancy that he was no longer her attorney, and that he was going to ask the court to place her on suicide watch.
Once back at the jail, Nancy Genovese was processed, including being issued prison “greens” to wear, and was photographed, fingerprinted, and eye scanned. Members of the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Department continuously verbally harassed Nancy. A woman in civilian clothes then interviewed Nancy. The woman told Nancy she was going to be placed in “general population.” During the interview, two men wearing “Suffolk County Emergency Response Team” jackets entered the room. One of them removed Nancy from the room and held her in the hallway outside of the interview room. From there, Nancy heard the woman who had interviewed her arguing with the other man, saying that “She is not suicidal.”
Despite the woman’s protests, Nancy was physically moved by the two men wearing “Suffolk County Emergency Response Team” jackets to another room. There, another woman who identified herself as a nurse administered, without Nancy’s consent, two injections into Nancy’s arm. One of the men held Nancy’s head so that she could not see what was being done, while the other man held Nancy’s arm down. Despite her demands to know what they were doing, no one answered her. Nancy experienced bruising and swelling in her neck and arm long after she was released from custody.
Nancy was then escorted by the two men into a cell area, where she was forced to disrobe and put on a “suicide gown”, consisting of a heavy, jacket-type blanket that fastens around the body with Velcro. Nancy was not permitted to wear undergarments under the blanket. Nancy was required to wear this same “suicide gown” for the next several days. After three days, Nancy was evaluated by a psychiatrist who determined her to be of sound and stable mind, and immediately removed her from suicide watch.
Later that day, bail was posted, and Nancy was able to go home. Subsequently, all charges against Nancy were dismissed.
Upon Nancy’s release, Undersheriff Caracappa issued a press release in response to media inquiries, titled “Armed Woman Arrested for Trespassing at Suffolk County Gabreski Airport”, which falsely stated that Nancy had been taking pictures of the airport and surrounding security”, and that she became hysterical, and began “screaming and flailing around” when confronted. Undersheriff Caracappa also falsely reported that Nancy had surveillance equipment, 500 rounds of ammunition, and “scary weapons” in her car, and that she was a right-wing extremist and terrorist, and that she had been at the airport trespassing several times and had been warned to stay away. Upon further inquiry, it turns out that Nancy had never trespassed at the airport before, had never been warned by anyone to “stay away” before, had no “surveillance equipment” of any kind other than her point and shoot camera, and certainly was not a terrorist. Undersheriff Caracappa has refused to issue a retraction or correction.
Nancy has filed a Federal Lawsuit seeking up to 70 million dollars from the Town of Southampton, the County of Suffolk, Lieutenant Iberger, Undersheriff Caracappa, Deputy Carlock, Lieutenant Leuete, and various other employees of the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Department. The lawsuit is still ongoing.
EDITOR’S NOTES:
All of the alleged facts discussed in this article have been taken directly from the court documents filed in this case.
Nancy Genovese was on public property the entire time. At no time did she trespass onto airport property, which is why the trespassing charge (the only charge against her) was dismissed.
Here is the google maps view of the airport entrance, and the helicopter on display. Although Undersheriff Caracappa released a statement saying that Nancy was previously spotted around the airport in the past and had previously been warned not to return, not a single person can verify his claim. Nancy claims that she was never warned to “stay away” from a public area outside a tourist attraction.
Yes, to some, Nancy’s claims seem far fetched and outrageous. But let’s look at the facts that both sides can agree on. Not a single crime was actually committed by Nancy. Yet, she was held against her will, in an isolated cell, in essentially a straight jacket, with no medical attention, for several days.
Sodi lawyer with a sordid past
LongIslandLawyerBlog.com February 18, 2011
The Town of Southampton has failed to timely file an answer to the Nancy Genovese lawsuit, possibly leaving the taxpayers of the town on the hook for $70 million dollars. A motion for a default judgment has been filed against the Town of Southampton and Town of Southampton Police Officer Robert Iberger, and we are awaiting a decision by the court.
So what happened, and how could the town fail to defend itself against such a large lawsuit?
Michael C. Sordi, the Town Attorney for the Town of Southampton, represents both the town and defendant Robert Iberger, a Town of Southampton Police Officer. He is the attorney responsible for defending both the town and the Southampton Police, but as a result of personal issues, he inadvertently “forgot” to serve an answer. Sordi states in court documents that he telephoned counsel for the Plaintiff the day before his answer was due, advising that his mother was in extremis, and that the doctors treating her had suggested that her death was imminent. He was granted a verbal two week extension, but did not follow up in writing, as he was en route to his mother’s bedside.
A week later, the Town Attorney’s mother passed away. One week later, the Town Attorney’s 25 year old nephew died suddenly and unexpectedly. Michael Sordi states that over the course of these weeks he was in and out of his office tending to family business and grieving the loss of his family members, and that he quite frankly “forgot” that he had not served an answer in this case. He states “I simply got ‘caught up’ in my personal events and I thought, erroneously, that I had actually served the Answer, when in fact I had forgotten to upon my return to work.”
This has not been the first time that the Town Attorney has missed a deadline. Last year, he failed to timely file a response to a lawsuit against the town by a level 3 sex offender, putting the town at risk for an excessive judgment. Luckily, the delay in that case was positively resolved for the town.
Before Michael Sordi was appointed as the Town Attorney for the Town of Southampton, he was the lead attorney in Nassau County in a high profile federal case involving excessive force by a Nassau County police officer. The county lost the case, and the jury awarded the plaintiff nearly $20 million dollars. Michael Sordi was fired by Nassau County shortly thereafter in December 2009. Republican County Attorney John Ciampoli clamed Mr. Sordi, as the lead council on the case, did not complete any prepatory work for several pretrial motions that needed to be filed. He stated “I would characterize that case as having been grossly mismanaged and mishandled by my predecessors in virtually every way that I could imagine.”
Although town officials were aware of the Nassau County mess, they hired Mr. Sordi anyway. Last Friday, Michael C. Sordi, the Town Attorney for the Town of Southampton, was asked to submit his resignation. As part of his parting package, he will receive one month’s salary (his annual salary was $115,000), compensation for unused vacation and sick days, and the town will pay for his health insurance coverage through May 2011. Mr. Sordi also had the town sign an agreement that the town will “fully, forever, irrevocably and unconditionally” release him from any liability in claims or lawsuits brought against the town.
No word yet on if the taxpayers of the Town of Southampton will be on the hook for the $70 million dollar default judgment.
A person is guilty of criminal trespass in the third degree when he knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in a building or upon real property (a) which is fenced or otherwise enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders; or (b) where the building is utilized as an elementary or secondary school or a children's overnight camp as defined in section one thousand three hundred ninety-two of the public health law or a summer day camp as defined in section one thousand three hundred ninety-two of the public health law in violation of conspicuously posted rules or regulations governing entry and use thereof; or (c) located within a city with a population in excess of one million and where the building or real property is utilized as an elementary or secondary school in violation of a personally communicated request to leave the premises from a principal, custodian or other person in charge thereof; or (d) located outside of a city with a population in excess of one million and where the building or real property is utilized as an elementary or secondary school in violation of a personally communicated request to leave the premises from a principal, custodian, school board member or trustee, or other person in charge thereof; or (e) where the building is used as a public housing project in violation of conspicuously posted rules or regulations governing entry and use thereof; or (f) where a building is used as a public housing project in violation of a personally communicated request to leave the premises from a housing police officer or other person in charge thereof; or (g) where the property consists of a right-of-way or yard of a railroad or rapid transit railroad which has been designated and conspicuously posted as a no-trespass railroad zone, pursuant to section eighty-three-b of the railroad law, by the city or county in which such property is located. Criminal trespass in the third degree is a class B misdemeanor.
We read it. I had three different attorneys look at the charge and all had the same response. I ended up retaining a criminal lawyer on Broadway and a civil lawyer on Park Avenue, NYC.
Rather expensive for an “unemployed, single mother of three.” But the truth is I am a retired, single mother of three with a huge savings account from an excellent career. The sheriff thought he arrested a poor welfare mom who could not fight back. Surprise!
I have one charge 140.10 only. I was across the street on the county road in my car. Amazing how rumor can go viral and become so twisted.
Though I appreciate that site and info you posted, the numbers you mention mean nothing in this case as my one official charge is 140.10.
I would hope after over 12 hours of interrogation, the sheriff, grasping at straws for anything he can find to charge a legal citizen with, they would get it right. It was not until the under sheriff, Caracappa saw my myspace. He didnt like my political views and told me around 3 am I was under arrest.
I don’t do drugs I don’t drink, I have no mental problem, I never in my life lost control, my firearms were transported legally, registered, I have no priors…so what do they do?
Trespassing 3 on the shoulder of a county road? Even the parking signs were in order, they didn’t say no standing.
Trespassing 3 is not a legal charge to arrest someone and further make a smear campaign to smear their good name all over the media.
Thanks for the info, I appreciate it and I like that site you posted.
Regards, Nancy.
Well my friend, I have to thank you for leaving the posts up and our discussions were good. I have good news, I do hope you will let this post go up on the forum; Today, November 17, 2009, this one charge and the entire case has been DISMISSED. Southampton Justice court, 116 Hampton Road. Southampton NY 11968.
I paid for a trial and the DA dropped the charge. Our country is in a pretty sad state of affairs when something like this can happen to an innocent citizen. More info and contact lists are available at my blog on myspace.
My notices of claim is filed for wrongful arrest and deformation on a timely basis, three weeks ago. Its just too bad the media ran the wrong way with this in an attempt to go after Beck. You have other reasons for boycotting Beck, I am sorry the mainstream media saw it fit to include me in there quest, but in this case they were wrong.
Thanks!
Regards, Nancy Genovese
Cliff Clark had a massive stroke one month after winning his case...
THE DRAGONATER WINS IN TRAFFIC COURT AT DEALS GAP, RAISES SPEED LIMIT TO 65 MPH ON THE DRAGON - NOLLE PROSEQUI BY BLOUNT COUNTY ATTORNEY GENERAL. NO TESTIMONY, HEARING NOR TRIAL WHATSOEVER. 60 MPH SPEEDING TICKET DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, COSTS PAID BY THE STATE, IN BLOUNT COUNTY GENERAL SESSIONS COURT WITH JUDGE BREWER. THP TROOPER RANDALL HUCKEBY ADMITTED ON VIDEOTAPE DURING TRAFFIC STOP THAT ALL SPEEDING TICKETS NORTHBOUND ON US129 AT MILE MARKER 0.5 ARE FEDERAL JURISDICTION, NOT STATE JURISDICTION (VIDEO BY THE DRAGONATER). TDOT ADMITTED IN WRITING THAT THE MANDATORY TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SURVEY SPEED AUDIT WAS NEVER PERFORMED, IN VIOLATION OF TN CODE, THUS THE POSTED 30 MPH SPEED LIMIT ON THE DRAGON REVERTS TO THE DEFAULT 65 MPH IN TN CODE. THE DRAGONATER ALSO MADE VIDEO OF TROOPER HUCKEBY SPEEDING UP TO 60 MPH ON THE DRAGON IN A 30 MPH ZONE, WITHOUT MANDATORY EMERGENCY LIGHTS NOR SIREN, IN VIOLATION OF TN CODE, AND PERJURY IN HIS PERSONNEL FILE, WHICH SHOWED HIS $100,000+ SALARY. 2007 TDOT SAFETY AUDIT REPORT CONFESSED THAT THP'S JOB IS TO BAN ALL COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES ON THE DRAGON, SO THP TICKETS INCREASED 11,400% IN BLOUNT COUNTY. THP'S STALKER RADAR OPERATOR MANUAL CONFESSED THAT RADAR CANNOT MEASURE THE SPEED OF VEHICLES WITHIN 18 MPH OF ACTUAL SPEED. WATCH THIS SPACE FOR FULL EVIDENCE FILE. UPDATE 7 MARCH 2011
Many today are angry at our justice system, and many of them have good cause to be angry!
But, some are too angry!
Their anger will hurt you!
They are out of control!
They teach falsehoods!
They're that angry!
That's how you know them.
They are not your friend!
Their "legal theories" fail.
They are blinded by rage.
Believe them at your peril.
Angry people can rarely be trusted, and that is never more true than when they try to get you to join them in their angry legal theories that run contrary to the rules that control our courts.
#1 For example, a nice fellow called me the other day and ended up screaming at me because I refused to go along with his idea that our birth certificates are some kind of "contract". In the first place, the most fundamental truth about contracts is that no "contract" can bind a party who doesn't understand the agreement. Even if we were able to understand the alleged binding nature of our birth certificate at the moment of our birth, we didn't sign the thing! Some doctor did, probably. We cannot be bound by a contract we don't understand, and certainly not one we didn't enter into. Yet, this nice man screamed at me for refusing to help him storm the hated walls of justice for him and take up his cause to fight the dragons!
#2 Another strange legal myth that's come around in the last few months is that one can "copyright" his or her own name and thereby prevent the courts from using their name on any court papers. Duh! Anger does twist the mind in strange ways! But, to think one can prevent others from using his or her name by "copyrighting" the name is utter nonsense.
I want you to win.
You cannot win relying on nonsense!
#3 A few are absolutely convinced that our courts are "sitting in admiralty" and therefore cannot rule in common law or statute. But, the fact is that pretty much any court can rule in admiralty cases, if the issue before them is one that involves navigation or the rights of seagoing workers or dockside stevedores. Contract disputes, negligence cases, foreclosure, and other matters are absolutely not admiralty cases, and the courts that hear such cases are not "sitting in admiralty" ... no matter whether there's a yellow fringe on the flag in the corner or not.
#4 More than a few seem to have made a "religion" out of believing such things. Many claim to be "patriots", yet do all they can to evade the Rule of Law and refuse to do much of anything toward learning the principles of due process so many gave their lives to protect in past and present wars! This group of people get together to talk about how horrible things are but spend very little effort learning how to make things better by learning the rules!
I know people are hurting.
I've been helping thousands upon thousands of good people get justice in the courts since 1997 when I first put Jurisdictionary on the internet. It wasn't much back then, but I've been doing all I can to make it better each year and will do the best I can to continue in the months and years to come.
But!
If you choose to believe the lies, God help you!
Lies are what we're fighting to overcome.
Overcoming lies is what the rules are all about!
Please don't get me wrong. I want to help those who are angry, as well as those who are being destroyed by crooked bankers, corrupt judges, lying lawyers, and the hosts of darkness that never seem to give up in their quest to destroy all that's good and wholesome in this world we live in.
But!
YOU ... that's right ... YOU cannot afford to believe the lies if you want to get justice in our courts!
Your birth certificate is not a contract.
You are who you are, no matter whether your name is spelled in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS or all small letters or written out in script with a ball-point pen!
And, as far as our courts go, nobody (and I do mean nobody) knows better than I do about the corruption of some judges or the stealth and trickery that lawyers use to twist the truth to their own advantage.
But, being angry won't help.
The only thing that will help is learning how to use the rules that control the courts, rules that stop corruption, rules that require judges to grant justice, rules that were paid for by far too much innocent blood already.
Beware that Mr Graves never mentions how to win in "traffic court" nor criminal court, nor how to tell when traffic court is civil not criminal, as all city courts are in Tennessee.
Google:
Bankston v State, Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals
Like sheep, humanity had better adjust to constant harassment as long as it tolerates Illuminati control of all important government and social institutions.
At the height of the holiday season, millions of travelers to the US were delayed and inconvenienced because of one suspicious incident Friday.
In 1969, Rockefeller Insider Dr. Richard Day, medical director of Planned Parenthood [that genocided more than 100-million US citizens] predicted the future in these terms:
Travel would become very restricted. People would need permission to travel and they would need a good reason to travel. If you didn't have a good reason for your travel you would not be allowed to travel, and everyone would need ID. later on some sort of device would be developed to be implanted under the skin that would be coded specifically to identify the individual.
And he predicted, or rather expounded on, changes that were planned for the remainder of this century. Drug use would be increased. Alcohol use would be increased. Law enforcement efforts against drugs would be increased.
On first hearing that, it sounded like a contradiction. Why increase drug abuse and simultaneously increase law enforcement against drug abuse? But the idea is that, in part, the increased availability of drugs would provide a sort of law of the jungle whereby the weak and the unfit would be selected out.
There was a statement made at the time: 'Before the earth was overpopulated, there was a law of the jungle where only the fittest survived.' You had to be able to protect yourself against the elements and wild animals and disease. And if you were fit, you survived. But now we've become so civilized – we're over civilized – and the unfit are enabled to survive, only at the expense of those who are more fit. And the abusive drugs then, would restore, in a certain sense, the law of the jungle, and selection of the fittest for survival.
News about drug abuse and law enforcement efforts would tend to keep drugs in the public consciousness. And would also tend to reduce this unwarranted American complacency that the world is a safe place, and a nice place.
The same thing would happen with alcohol. Alcohol abuse would be both promoted and demoted at the same time. The vulnerable and the weak would respond to the promotions and, therefore, use and abuse more alcohol. Drunk driving would become more of a problem; and stricter rules about driving under the influence would be established so that more and more people would lose their privilege to drive.
This also had connection with something we'll get to later about overall restrictions on travel. Not everybody should be free to travel the way they do now in the United States. People don't have a need to travel that way. It's a privilege! It was a kind of a high-handed way it was put.
Again, much more in the way of psychological services would be made available to help those who got hooked on drugs and alcohol. The idea being, that in order to promote this – drug and alcohol abuse to screen out some of the unfit people who are otherwise pretty good – would also be subject to getting hooked. And if they were really worth their salt they would have enough sense to seek psychological counseling and to benefit from it. So this was presented as sort of a redeeming value on the part of the planners. It was as if he were saying, 'you think we're bad in promoting these evil things — but look how nice we are – we're also providing a way out!' More jails would be needed. Hospitals could serve as jails. Some new hospital construction would be designed so as to make them adaptable to jail-like use.
In the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the author writes that their goal is: "To wear everyone out by dissensions, animosities, feuds, famine, inoculation of diseases, want, until the Gentiles sees no other way of escape except by appeal to our money and our power." (Protocol 10)
"We will so wear out and exhaust the Gentiles by all this that they will be compelled to offer us an international authority, which by its position will enable us to absorb without disturbance all the governmental forces of the world and thus form a super-government." (Protocol 5)
"There's a report out tonight that 24-years ago I was apprehended in Kennebunkport, Maine, for a DUI. That's an accurate story. I'm not proud of that. I oftentimes said that years ago I made some mistakes. I occasionally drank too much and I did on that night. I was pulled over. I admitted to the policeman that I had been drinking. I paid a fine. And I regret that it happened. But it did. I've learned my lesson." —President George W. Bush, CNN Larry King Live, November 2, 2000
"Strictly speaking, a driver can register a BAC of 0.00% and still be convicted of a DUI. The level of BAC does not clear a driver when it is below the 'presumed level of intoxication.'" —Tennessee Driver Handbook and Driver License Study Guide
"Don't get a DUI. When a cop pulls you over..... shoot him!" (crowd cheered wildly) -Christopher Scum, The Dirty Works, Rebel Scum movie premier, Knoxville Tennessee
