Categorized | NSP Radio Archive

NSP – Mar 22, 2014 – Co-host: JT – [DRAFT VERSION]

Posted on March 22nd, 2014 by Calvin

Co-host: JT.

Show Notes:

Caller’s Topics:

  • Rick from NV: $3,500 worth of traffic citations dismissed from court by keeping the burden of proof on the prosecution/complainant <> the use of threat of violence from police when they interact with [too] many of their victims <> clarifying if you are “under arrest” or if you’re “free to go” during an unwelcome police encounter <> taking the wiser and safer route by challenging the government agent’s authority in an open courtroom with witnesses rather than on the roadside without witnesses where your well-being is much more vulnerable <> successfully exercising the right to freely travel without STATE identification <> returning the citation back to the police department as “refused for cause” within 3 days via certified mail <> refusing to contract, or being tricked into contracting, with government agents <> recording a “schedule of fees” to easily tally-up damages incurred from unnecessarily being forced to litigation <> Winston Shrout‘s teaching that “an unrebutted affidavit stands as truth” in court <> lack of notice of a warrant and collection agency assignment when the prosecution said they weren’t going to prosecute the complaint <> undercover law enforcement entrapping their victims <> and challenging the fallacy of “government by and for the consent of the governed.”
  • Imran form AZ: Kids for Cash documentary that exposes judges who bypass basic due-process in order to receive kick-backs from lobbyists for sending non-violent juvenile offenders straight into the mouth prison-industrial complex beast <> possible legitimate points make by sovereign citizen advocates who don’t make their points coherently enough <> police refuse to respond to a trespassing offense without production of STATE identification from the complainant <> the contradictory nature of police operations <> and the media’s priority of animal rights over human rights.
  • Gary and Brandon from Ohio: the corporate nature of the STATE <> legal-fictions can posses ownership <> the constitution only applies to those who take an oath to it [editor's commentary: interesting... methinks try getting a judge to abide by the constitution and experience how much it applies to them and what they do ;) ] <> US presidents are only presidents for Washington DC <> the corporate UNITED STATES only really owns parks <> the STATE courts are admiralty courts <> walking through the definitions of STATE and CITIZEN <>

—FULL PODCAST IS CURRENTLY UNDER PRODUCTION—

              

14 Comments For This Post

  1. Martin Padilla Says:

    10 years ago, my perception of the Government was of integrity, honesty, and very proud to be an American, an American Citizen. Now that I know how they operate, I feel robbed and violated and I have lost all reapect to all of them, especially the No-brain-cops, Who think they are above the Law. I am not ANTI- GOVERNMENT, I AM ANTI-CORRUPTION.

  2. NonE Says:

    So Martin, am I correctly understanding that you believe in the forceful control of some people by other people… as long as some people make rules about how the subjugation occurs? – NonE

  3. Martin Padilla Says:

    Not really in that perspective NonE, any contract under duress it is not really a lawful contract. The basis for the legal authority to establish government franchises is the right to preemptively protect the public from harmful or injurious activities: This form of “PROTECTION” is called “REGULATION”. Civil statutory law implements the regulation. The executive Branch of the government institutes all enforcement actions that do the regulating. The regulation or enforcement CANNOT lawfully be instituted against EXCLUSIVELY PRIVATE people or activities. The right to regulate EXCLUSIVELY private rights and private property is repugnant to the Co.

  4. Martin Padilla Says:

    Constitution. Those who are the subject of the regulation have to volunteer to be regulated by filling out a government application. The process of APPLYING is synonymous with the implied consent of the application to BE civilly regulated. Such applications are called by any of the following name: license application, Driver License, or Contractor License applications, Registration, Voter registration, Application for a Social Security Nunber Card, Form SS-5

  5. Martin Padilla Says:

    The process of applying for thr “BENEFIT” of the protection afforded by the regulation: Constitutes implied or constructive consent to DONATE formerly PRIVATE PROPERTY to a public use, public purpose, or public office in order to procure the “BENEFITS” of the franchise. (Government entity)

  6. Martin Padilla Says:

    Consonant with the civil regulation of the applicant is the right to “extract fees” and/or taxes that pay for the “benefit” of the regulation. This would include vehicle registration fees, property taxes, Social Security deductions, etc.

  7. Andy Says:

    Benefit???

    You can’t be serious.

    “It’s not their laws that control you. Their laws are designed to hide the gun in the room. It’s their threats of violence against you that controls you. If you don’t “pay” their tax they’ll kidnap you and put you in a cage. You “pay” their tax to avoid the violence they’ll inflict on you. You get their Driver’s license not because it helps you operate a car. You get a Driver’s License as a defensive measure against their violence.”

    Cont: marcstevens.net/board/thread-6262-post-41547.html#pid41547

  8. Andy Says:

    I think I get it. Benefit is to plunder as anarchy is to mayhem as honesty is to deception. 1984 for 2014.

  9. Martin Padilla Says:

    You are totally correct Andy, I “pay” their tax to avoid the confiscation of my “private property.” I can be the subject of criminal duress, SIMULATION OF LEGAL PROCESS, witness tampering, and International Terrorism. One day under the guidance and experiences of all of You, I believe I will find my way out.

  10. Ben Says:

    Eddie Izzard – Dressed to Kill

    I remember seeing that on Showtime, or was it HBO, years ago! LMAO!!

    “What is it left handed Sebastian?”

    “It’s just the Rebels sir….their here.”

    “My god man! Do they want tea?”

    “No I think their after something more than that sir. I don’ know what it is but they brought flag!”

    LMAO! LMAO! LMAO!

  11. Jan Says:

    well put Andy..”“It’s not their laws that control you. Their laws are designed to hide the gun in the room. It’s their threats of violence against you that controls you. If you don’t “pay” their tax they’ll kidnap you and put you in a cage. ….etc”

  12. Steve Says:

    Where’s the full podcast?

  13. Martin Padilla Says:

    Without disclosure and under the threat of violence; THERE IS NO CONTRACT.

  14. Jonathan Rabbitt Says:

    Jan,
    There laws are a declaration in advance of their willingness to exert force. The political process (politicians, elections etc) is the smokescreen.

    Jonathan

Leave a Reply

Advertise Here

Upcoming Events

Saturdays, 4-7pm EST: NSP radio LIVE. Tune-in as we discuss the general topics of tickets, tyrants, assessments, and bringing about a voluntary society.

Saturday, August 2nd, Marc will not be live, but we will have all new content that will be broadcast. If you are in the Northern Arizona area, join Marc, Larken Rose, 4409, Ernest Hancock, and others at the Jackalope Freedom Festival.



Click here to find out how to call-in with your questions and comments, join the Skype group-chat, tune-in to terrestrial and digital broadcasts, use the phone-in listen line, subscribe to the iTunes archive feed, and much more.

------------------------PAYMENT NOTICE------------------------

I'm working on getting a paypal alternative, for now, you can use Dwolla for payments, use marcstevens(at)mail(dot)com

WeAcceptBitcoin

Bitcoin: 1NayJiRhb7gtVcSS4yNn6hxo6TJFPrQgb6









Join Marc Stevens' Newsletter


Advertise Here