Home

Government Promises to Cut Social Security in Urgent Compromise

February 26, 2011

ppjg Social Security , , , , , , 1 Comment

Friday, February 25, 2011

It’s official, national austerity measures are here!  As Wisconsin protesters fill the streets because of lost rights and benefits to workers, the nation is gearing up to face similar losses with social security being cut.  Comedian George Carlin warned us that this day would come:
GEORGE CARLIN: Who really controls America?

READ MORE

Defining the “United States”

February 26, 2011

ppjg Constitution, PROPERTY RIGHTS, WATER , , , , , , , , , 16 Comments

Guest Author:  Danny Martinez (c)copyright 2011

_____________________________________________

“To fully understand the impact of changing the wording from navigable waters to waters of the United States one must understand the clear meaning of what “United States” means.”

________________________________________________

UNITED STATES

In April 2, 2009, S. 787 the Clean Water Restoration Act was introduced to the 111th Congress,  which was a bill to amend the “Federal Water Pollution Control Act” to clarify the jurisdiction of the United States over waters of the United States. Section 1 Short Title says “This Act may be cited as the Clean Water Restoration Act.”  The purpose of the Act was to (1) to reaffirm the original intent of Congress in enacting the Federal Water Pollution control Act Amendments of 1972 (Public Law 92-500; 86 Stat. 816) to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of the United States; and (2) to clarify define the waters of the United States that are subject to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.)as those features that were treated as such pursuant to the final rule (including the preamble that final rule) published at 53 Fed. Reg. 20764 (June6, 1988) and 51 Fed Reg 41206 (November 13, 1986) and other applicable rules and interpretations in effect on January, 8, 2001.” [emphasis added]

This act has caused a lot of reaction from the states in regards to their sovereignty and their jurisdiction over waters within the boundaries of their respective states. This has not been diminished in any manner as Sect. 3 Findings (5) “Congress Supports the policy in effect under section 101(g) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251(g)), which states that the authority of each State to allocate quantities of water within its jurisdiction shall not be superseded, abrogated or otherwise impaired by this Act. ….” [emphasis added]

To fully understand the impact of changing the wording from navigable waters to waters of the United States one must understand the clear meaning of what “United States” means.

In 1945 the Supreme Court in Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945) defined the term “United States” as having three distinct meanings ; “The term “United States” may be used in any one of several senses. It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations. It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty to the United States [672] extends, or it may be the collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution.” More

Guardianship FAQ’s from ElderAbuse.org

February 26, 2011

ppjg Guardianship Abuse , , , , , , , , 4 Comments

-by- Angela V. Woodhull, Ph.D. © 2011, AV Woodhull

______________________________________________________

“There is no such thing as a “good attorney” who wants to end the nightmare that has been created for you and your loved one. All attorneys are paid out of the “ward’s” assets. This is like asking an oil company to stop drilling for oil. The only way an oil corporation will stop drilling for oil (in a particular area) is when they are certain that all the oil in that area has been depleted. Likewise, attorneys will stop the proceedings when all of your loved one’s money has been converted to attorneys’ fees.”

______________________________________________

At least every couple of weeks, I receive a frantic call from a predatory guardianship victim—hoping, somehow, that I will have an answer for him or her.

Each time I receive one of these calls, I am torn up for hours afterwards.

I literally cry.

I have no answers for you. I am simply 100 yards down the road watching you walk the same path I/We have already walked.

Today was one such day. I spoke to the grandson of an 89-year-old woman who is being held hostage in a dungeon they call a nursing home.

She was removed from her grandson’s lovely home–based upon a false allegation. And even though he was cleared of all the allegations, a guardianship was commenced and continues.

That’s it. An allegation. I have stated before that these allegations need not be true. More

%d bloggers like this: