Arizona Special Operations Group

OPF
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2015 4:56 pm

Re: Arizona Special Operations Group

#176

Post by OPF » Fri Sep 11, 2015 9:11 pm

BillTheCat wrote:
OPF wrote:

I have written as Outpost of Freedom since February 1993, including a series of articles from Waco, during the Branch Davidian siege.
How completely unsurprising. I bet Koresh The Child Rapist was your hero, right?
The age of majority in Texas, in 1993, was 12 for females, 14 for males.
I find no instance of what you suggest, except in the testimony of one young girl caught up in a custody dispute, reported my MS< on behalf of Marc Berault.
No, he was not my hero, nor was McVeigh, except in your deluded effort to go after the messenger. , however, I went to see what was really happening, not what the television told me.
http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/wacoind.htm

OPF
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2015 4:56 pm

Re: Arizona Special Operations Group

#177

Post by OPF » Fri Sep 11, 2015 9:13 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:I believe the "merits" of the habeas petition was that the government had no jurisdiction over the defendant. A true winning SovCit argument. (But only in the imaginations of SovCits.)
Then those "SovCits" were legal scholars and Supreme Court justices. But, I wouldn't want to have to ask you to read more than a few words at a time, and, likewise, write more than a few words at a time.
So, keep up the ad hominem. It seems to be all that you are capable of.

User avatar
Family Liberty Patriot
Posts: 4486
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2014 1:23 pm
Location: Southern Orlystan
Occupation: Czar of All the Russias

Re: Arizona Special Operations Group

#178

Post by Family Liberty Patriot » Fri Sep 11, 2015 9:14 pm

OPF wrote:The age of majority in Texas, in 1993, was 12 for females, 14 for males.
Ridiculous. Citation very much needed. 1793 or 1893, maybe.

And, for the record, when your arguments are shredded and you're personally insulted, it's not a mere ad hominem, another Latin phrase you don't comprehend. It's just a bonus insult on top of your humiliation.
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."

John Kenneth Galbraith (1908 - 2006)

OPF
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2015 4:56 pm

Re: Arizona Special Operations Group

#179

Post by OPF » Fri Sep 11, 2015 9:18 pm

bob wrote:
Sterngard Friegen wrote:I believe the "merits" of the habeas petition was that the government had no jurisdiction over the defendant. A true winning SovCit argument. (But only in the imaginations of SovCits.)
Yeah: it was some nutbar argument that the defendant was not a citizen of the United States, and therefore the federal courts didn't have jurisdiction over him. Which must be a comfort to all the foreign nationals who violate federal law.
Twining v. State of New Jersey 211 US 78 (1908).
It was what Justice Moody said in the Court's decision.
I hadn't been born, yet.

So, this being the last slap showing, I'll leave the animals in their cage, for a while.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 26821
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Arizona Special Operations Group

#180

Post by bob » Fri Sep 11, 2015 9:24 pm

OPF wrote: I presumed that you were able to read. However, if you are not, then just stick to slinging shit.
It is explained sufficiently in the document. And, since you think it is all my words, you would have to read the cites to realize tyhat it was no9t me that laid the foundation.
And I presumed you could read, as I already responded. And I presumed you would have the courtesy to provide a link, to encourage the attention you crave.

Again: I recall your "argument" relied on two false premises: that the defendant wasn't really a citizen of the United States, and that only U.S. citizens are subject to federal law.

And that you misinterpreting what others have written was pure SovCit, of course.

Oh: Twining is no longer good law. It hasn't been for 50 years. Try to keep up.
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 26821
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Arizona Special Operations Group

#181

Post by bob » Fri Sep 11, 2015 9:36 pm

Let me help you: In Twining, SCOTUS ruled the 5th Amendment privilege against self-incrimination applied only to federal criminal proceedings, and not state criminal proceedings. In 1964, SCOTUS overruled Twining, holding the 5th Amendment privilege applied to both federal and state criminal proceedings.

The rest is your SovCit imaginings.

And thanks for the flounce.
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
RoadScholar
Posts: 7960
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:25 am
Location: Baltimore
Occupation: Historic Restoration Woodworker
Contact:

Re: Arizona Special Operations Group

#182

Post by RoadScholar » Fri Sep 11, 2015 10:37 pm

Might as well clear up ad hominem for you since you're being so generously and patiently educated.

Ad hominem is arguing that a proposition is false because the proposer is a liar, or an idiot, or bad of faith, having some ulterior motive.

It is a fallacy because such a proposer may in fact advance a valid argument. It might be out of character, but it is certainly possible. Therefore the argument form above is a non sequitur.

The only thing that counts is countering the proposition, not besmirching the source. Now, the source may need defaming (as a noble duty to humanity) but such commentary cannot advance your argument.

And so, when someone says (as they should) that you are a deluded, weak-minded buffoon as regards law and Constitutional history and your SovShit theories are preposterously incorrect, they are not necessarily speaking to causation or even correlation. They could be (and are) independent facts, both accurate.

And that is not an ad hominem argument. :)
The bitterest truth is healthier than the sweetest lie.
X3

User avatar
Dolly
Posts: 13882
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: Arizona Special Operations Group

#183

Post by Dolly » Sat Sep 12, 2015 2:38 am

OPF wrote:
The age of majority in Texas, in 1993, was 12 for females, 14 for males.
I find no instance of what you suggest, except in the testimony of one young girl caught up in a custody dispute, reported my MS< on behalf of Marc Berault.
CIVIL PRACTICE AND REMEDIES CODE
TITLE 6. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
CHAPTER 129. AGE OF MAJORITY

Sec. 129.001. AGE OF MAJORITY. The age of majority in this state is 18 years.
Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985.

Sec. 129.002. RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES, OR OBLIGATIONS. A law, rule, or ordinance enacted or adopted before August 27, 1973, that extends a right, privilege, or obligation to an individual on the basis of a minimum age of 19, 20, or 21 years shall be interpreted as prescribing a minimum age of 18 years.
Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985.
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... CP.129.htm
Growing Up Under Koresh: Cult Children Tell of Abuses
Published: May 4, 1993
......
The report depicts an insular religious community of many contradictions. Although men and women were strictly segregated, Dr. Perry writes that the children told him Mr. Koresh had "wives" as young as 11 and routinely discussed sex openly with even the youngest girls in Bible lessons.

Dr. Perry said that though the children seemed highly protective of the cult's secrets, "Over the course of two months, the kids became increasingly open about 11- and 12-year-old girls being David's wives." He said it was also clear in these conversations that the status of "wife" included having sex with Mr. Koresh. Under Texas law, sex by an adult with girls under the age of 17 is statutory rape, a felony.

Gerry Williams, a lawyer with the agency that oversees Child Protective Services, said that even Mr. Koresh's attempts to prepare young girls for sex appears to have been illegal in Texas. <SNIP>
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/05/04/us/gr ... buses.html
Avatar by Tal Peleg Art of Makeup https://www.facebook.com/TalPelegMakeUp

User avatar
SueDB
Posts: 27756
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

Re: Arizona Special Operations Group

#184

Post by SueDB » Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:32 am

Gee, so wrong again. :roll:
“If You're Not In The Obit, Eat Breakfast”

Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 44478
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Arizona Special Operations Group

#185

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat Sep 12, 2015 11:28 pm

Reading comprehension and reasoning skills are wanting.

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 16653
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Arizona Special Operations Group

#186

Post by Suranis » Sat Sep 12, 2015 11:38 pm

I answered several of your questions and you ignored it.
Learn to Swear in Latin. Profanity with class!
https://blogs.transparent.com/latin/lat ... -in-latin/

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 12381
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Arizona Special Operations Group

#187

Post by Notorial Dissent » Sun Sep 13, 2015 12:16 am

Sterngard Friegen wrote:Reading comprehension and reasoning skills are wanting.
They were present to begin with??
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 44478
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Arizona Special Operations Group

#188

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sun Sep 13, 2015 12:25 am

Absolutely not.

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 12381
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Arizona Special Operations Group

#189

Post by Notorial Dissent » Sun Sep 13, 2015 1:18 am

Oh, good, thought I might have missed something there for a second.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 26821
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Arizona Special Operations Group

#190

Post by bob » Mon Sep 14, 2015 5:37 pm

One of Hunt's favorite topics to be wrong write about is Kevin Lyndel "KC" Massey, a militia member who "patrolled" the U.S.-Mexico border but was charged with four counts of being a felon in possession of a firearm. (The charges stemmed from an entanglement involving militia members and a border patrol agent.)

The judge hearing Massey's case?: Andrew S. Hanen.

Once again, karma rewards Hanen.

(And, yes, those here following Massey had previously noted Hanen was the judge; I'm slow.)
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

Post Reply

Return to “FEMA Camp 7½”