Guardian Abuse: You Cannot Fix What Is Not Broken

Leave a comment

Marti Oakley

To contact us: tsrad1@outlook.com


“Also, by not declaring it a crime and providing equal access to the law, you and your family are trapped in these civil tribunals with no way out. You cannot get out of the civil tribunal and into a court of common law, and instead are subjected to statutes, codes and regulations that separate you from the law. Here you have no rights, no protections and cannot claim any, most especially anything Constitutional. The Constitutions, both State and Federal have no application here. And this also is intentional. This is not an oversight, or something they just simply forgot to include. They know exactly what they are doing, or not doing whatever the case may be.”


Most of us who have been battling the abuse of the elderly or those who just simply have assets that a predator in this system has decided they want, have operated under the idea that the system just needed repairing. If we just passed a new law. If we just readjusted the statutes. If we just went to the right representative or senator and got their attention, a lot of this corruption would be done away with; we would be safe from this growing class of predators who game the system for profit. It is my opinion that we have been addressing this issue from the wrong angle.

The system is not broken or not functioning as it was intended; it is operating exactly the way it was intended. That is what we failed to realize.

There are few of us who have met with politicians and other officials who have not come away with the deep sense of disbelief with what we encountered while visiting with them. The feigned ignorance of the issues. The platitudes and pandering along with the condescension can be stifling. Always these meetings come with the promises that they will look into it and do what ever they can to help. Only they don’t. Many elected officials openly express their disdain for the fact that they were confronted with these issues. After all, plausible deniability is paramount to escaping accountability. Once they are faced with the evidence, many become quite irritated.

You are talking about the organizations and professional unions like the BAR Associations who not only contribute massive amounts of money to political re-election coffers, but who also put all of this in place to begin with. You just caused a tremor in their bank accounts. And besides, they have really important things to worry about…and obviously the kidnapping, psychological torture, estate theft and eventual medical murder in many cases, of the elderly, isn’t one of those things. More

TS Radio: The Magnified View with “Yoda”


Join us Wednesday August 15, 2012,  at 7:00 CST! More

The Ruthie Report Illegal Immigration news and Information



The Ruthie Report with guest Rusty Fleming

Leave a comment

Join Ruthie Thursday Evenings at 8:00 CST! More

The Ruthie Report/illegal immigration


 Join Ruthie at 8CST thursday evenings! More

Oklahoma: “Sniffin’ Dirt”…Snitching on your neighbor will keep us all safe!


Marti Oakley (c)copyright 2011 All Rights Reserved


 This has nothing to do with security, crimes or anything else of that nature.  It is a snitch set up.  This is community training.  This is conditioning to get people comfortable with the idea of reporting on their neighbors; a concept repugnant to most free societies, but one very common to police states.


Homeland Security, that bastion of police state warriors has set up housekeeping in the once great state of Oklahoma.  Their new website “Red Dirt Ready” would be more aptly titled “Sniffin’ Dirt”.  The site, all plumped up with militant looking people, some who are, I suppose, supposed to represent first responders and medical personnel, encourages Oklahoman’s to be ready for an emergency!  Why!  You can even win yourself an emergency survival kit!  Oh!  And you can snitch on your neighbors too! 

In the upper right hand corner of the header is a “Report Activity” button.  I just had to check it out.  I quickly deduced that native Oklahomans must be somewhat dimwitted or at least Homeland Security and the FBI think they are. 

The page is brief:  More

Obama’s Pick for Attorney General May Have Power to Ban Guns at Will


Anyone who still has any doubts about Barrack Obama’s intentions to take our guns away should read this article. Obama’s choice for Attorney General, Eric Holder, could have the power to ban – at his discretion – all semi-automatic rifles and shotguns that are “designed for military or law enforcement use,” provided HR 1022 (now in House Subcommitte on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security) becomes law.

This would effectively disarm the people of the United States to such a degree they would be helpless in the event they had to defend themselves against a high-tech tryannical regime’s declaration of martial law and warfare on the American people. This would confine citizens to the use of crude, outdated bolt-action rifles and hunting shotguns – weapons that are not designed for self-defense as much as they are for hunting.

If HR 1022 becomes law, how much longer will it be before all guns are banned completely? Anyone who thinks it can’t happen here need only look at the UK, where it’s already happened, decades ago.

When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns – and the outlaws who are running our government obviously have a vested interest in seeing to it that this is exactly what will happen.

When Is Money Too Clean to be Laundered


by Vin Suprynowicz 

9:58 am March 17th, 2008 It’s a long-established tradition of meddlesome governments, seeking to outlaw behaviors which — unlike robbery and assault — produce no “victim” anxious to cooperate with authorities: When the first unenforceable law doesn’t work, ban another activity, previously considered innocuous, to help enforce the first.When authorities developed radar guns to enhance “speeding ticket” revenues from those seeking to make good time on long stretches of empty highway, citizens started buying radar detectors. Instead of eliminating needless speed limits on rural straightaways (where most accidents are caused by driver fatigue, not speed) and settling for enforcement of the sensible “reckless driving” laws, some money-hungry state governments turned to … banning radar detectors.

And here I thought it was only totalitarian regimes that punished people for tuning in the “wrong” radio signals.

When the ban on imported cocaine led some entrepreneurs to make substitute drugs out of cold pills — creating a wave of “meth lab” explosions in previously peaceful neighborhoods — manufacturers were pressured to remove otherwise innocuous ingredients, till today “Sudafed” doesn’t work the way it used to, because it no longer contains any pseudoephedrine.

Stymied in their efforts to stop even wealthier entrepreneurs from providing drugs and “sinful” services to willing customers in violation of federal edict — in part because the criminals had become sophisticated enough to hire fancy lawyers and install middlemen between themselves and the dope — Congress in 1986 enacted laws which enabled federal police to seize a suspect’s homes, cars, boats and cash before he’d been convicted of anything, under the newly thought-up prohibition against “money-laundering.” The law makes it a crime to transport money across a border with the intent to conceal the source, ownership or control of the funds.This is a dangerous law even when used as intended, since it sets a precedent which could be used in future to seize the cash and property of anyone deemed “too rich,” simply by asserting — no trial necessary — that any such vast wealth had to come from some criminal activity (“Can you PROVE where you got it all?”) and that holding it comprises the new crime of “hoarding,” anyway.

(G-men should stand forewarned: After the revolution, the crime will be to own homes, cars, bank accounts, investments — even kids’ college educations — paid for out of “unclean” money seized from the citizens under the false claim that this nation has ever had a “direct” income tax. Which means federal salaries. Find us the part of the Sixteenth amendment that reads “and said income taxes may be collected as a direct tax, with a duty of payment made incumbent on the average citizen, rather than as an indirect excise as dictated in Article I, Section 9 for any tax not capitated.”)

But even setting that objection aside, no one familiar with federal law enforcement will be surprised to learn the G-men are now using the “money-laundering” statute in cases never contemplated by Congress.Last October, the U.S. Supreme Court heard an appeal in the case of Efrain Santos, convicted of running an illegal lottery, or bolita, in northwest Indiana.Santos was sentenced to five years in prison on the gambling offense — and another 17 years for “money laundering,” based on the government’s contention that he was “laundering” his illegal proceeds by using them to compensate his employees and pay off the winning bettors.In a similar case heard by the high court earlier this month, officers stopped Humberto Cuellar in Schleicher County, Texas, about a hundred miles from Mexico after his car swerved onto the shoulder of the road. Authorities subsequently found more than $80,000 in cash in a secret compartment in the car. Cuellar was convicted of international money laundering and sentenced to 6-and-a-half years in prison.

In Washington this month, justices seemed rightly skeptical of the assertion that merely hiding cash in a car headed for Mexico — absent evidence that the suspect sold drugs, managed a prostitution ring, or anything else nefarious — constitutes international money laundering, which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison.“No grand design” was shown, said Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, echoing the skepticism of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer and David Souter. “All he is is a courier.”In the October case of the illegal Indiana lottery, it was Justice Antonin Scalia who took a turn chiding a Justice Department lawyer for stretching the purpose of the money-laundering law. “Come on,” Justice Scalia said. “Nobody runs a gambling operation without paying off the winners. It’s not going to last very long. To make the paying off of the winners a separate crime from running the gambling operation seems to me quite extraordinary.”The justices are right to be skeptical.

The government brought money laundering cases against 1,347 people in 2006, according to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.Are we to believe they laid hands on 1,300 major drug kingpins in one year? 1,300 big-time “Godfathers” like Efrain Santos and Humberto Cuellar?It’s all too easy to say, like Tom Sawyer’s Aunt Polly, “Well, they probably committed other crimes when we weren’t looking.”Cynical commentators used to refer to such police-invented crimes as “driving while black.” The court should take firm steps, right now, to halt this pattern of overcharging, often designed to make the loaded-up prison sentence look so onerous that even innocent defendants may be tempted to “take the deal” in hopes of getting out before their small children are grown.

It is not a crime to “possess a lot of cash while Hispanic.” And those who will not stand up and say so, right now, may live to echo Pastor Martin Niemoller, who recalled that “There was no one left to object, when they finally came for me.” 

Vin Suprynowicz is listed on our blogroll……click on his link and go directly to his site to read more of his revealing articles. 

%d bloggers like this: