XPost: alt.society.sovereign, alt.society.anarchy, alt.society.revolution   
   XPost: alt.anarchism, talk.politics.misc, alt.politics.usa   
   XPost: alt.politics.usa.misc, alt.politics.reform   
   From: tributyltinpint@yahoo.co.uk   
      
   Raymond Karczewski wrote:   
   >   
   > Demand the Court Follow their Own Law and  PROVE JURISDICTION over Ed   
   > and Elaine Brown Before making a further Mockery of Justice in   
   > America.   
   >   
   >                         By Raymond Ronald Karczewski©   
   >   
   > Existing Case law states:  "Once jurisdiction is challenged, it must   
   > be proven." HAGENS vs LAVINE,  15 U.S. 533 "No sanctions can be   
   > imposed absent proof of jurisdiction." Standard v. Olsen, 74 S.  Ct.   
   > 768; Title 5 U.S.C., Sec. 556 and 558 (b). "Where there is absence of   
   > jurisdiction, all administrative and judicial proceedings are a   
   > nullity and confer no right, offer no protection, and afford no   
   > justification, and may  be rejected upon direct collateral attack."   
   > Thompson v. Tolmie, 2 Pet. 157, 7 L.Ed.  381; Griffith v. Frazier, 8   
   > Cr. 9, 3L. Ed. 471. "The law provides that once State and Federal   
   > jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven." Main   
   > v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502 (1980).   
   >   
   > Also, a Fiction Court, the creation, does not have JURISDICTION over   
   > any Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural Man or Woman   
   > of the Sovereign People, its creator,  who has not committed a crime   
   > under Common Law nor has waived their Unalienable Rights by   
   > consenting to and/or contracting with the Maritime government/court.   
   >   
   If the court lacks jurisdiction, why did you just cite it about six   
   times?   
      
      
      
      
   > Ed and Elaine have challenged the court at the onset of the present   
   > unlawful proceedings brought against them to prove JURISDICTION yet   
   > the courts will not follow their own law and prove such challenge in   
   > writing.  See Above.  Proceeding as such, the courts are committing a   
   > Fraud.   
   >   
   Then appeal. But you think that the courts should agree with your   
   idea that they have no jurisdiction at all. But that is nonsense.   
      
      
      
      
   --   
   "Oh, I'm broke."   
   "Take another mortgage, don't give in."   
   "I thought you were broke. Where did you get all that money from?"   
   "Don't question me."   
   "Where did you get it?"   
   "I borrowed it from the bank."   
   "Well, you can't do that, that's cheating."   
   "Listen you little stoat, I own Park Lane, I can borrow as much   
   bloody money as I like."   
   ~Joanna Lumley and Julia Sawalha, "Absolutely Fabulous"   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)