Home ->
Apollo BBS ->
Apollo Archive Index ->
December 1991 -> December 22
Apollo BBS Archive - December 22, 1991
_______________________________________
| . |d 9
|. . . . | |w 1 *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
| . . -+- | | MERRY CHRISTMAS |
| . . . . | | * FROM APOLLO 8.0 *
| . . | .| +-----------------------+
| . . . _____ . | | Arizona's Oldest BBS! |
| /_____\ | *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
| . . . . // \\ |
| || ___ || |
| . . . . || \_/ || |
|___________________________|| / \ ||_|
A Child will be born for us, a Son will be given to us, and the government
will be on His shoulder, and He will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty
God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace...And this is how you will know
Him: you will find a Baby all wrapped up and lying in a manger.
*=* Main Menu entered *=*
Main Menu command:U
$ Rod Williams 17:49:51 (1200)
$ Felix Cat 17:14:33 (2400)
$ Mike Carter 16:56:26 (2400)
Paul Harris 16:38:03 (2400)
$ Gordon Little 15:50:39 (2400)
Steve Albany 14:44:09 (2400)
$ Beauregard Dog 10:07:16 (2400)
$ Archi Medes 09:56:51 (1200)
$ Archi Medes 09:33:04 (1200)
$ Ann Oudin 07:35:47 (2400)
James Matlock 06:49:48 (1200)
$ Mike McNeill 06:42:18 (2400)
James Matlock 06:35:39 (1200)
James Matlock 06:01:54 (1200)
$ Paul Savage 05:43:26 (1200)
$ Funky Alf 05:26:38 (2400)
$ Nick Ianuzzi 04:15:26 (2400)
$ Nick Ianuzzi 04:10:18 (2400)
$ Funky Alf 03:41:40 (2400)
$ Funky Alf 03:39:39 (2400)
$ Mike Carter 03:13:44 (2400)
$ Gordon Little 02:59:16 (2400)
James Matlock 02:38:15 (1200)
$ James Hawley 00:24:20 (2400)
$ Rod Williams 00:12:55 (1200)
Main Menu command:P
*=* Post Office entered *=*
Mail from James Hawley
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 00:27:19
[A]bort, [N]ew only, [R]ead or [S]kip:Read
I'm doing fine.... 1700 this week. Of course I had to work a lot in the
rain, and had to go to Cave Creek tonight, but it could be worse.
But things change, week to week.
[A]bort, [C]ontinue, [I]nsty-reply or [Z]ap:Insty-reply
Enter a line containing only an [*] to stop
1:How is your mother-in-law's eyes? I went to Buckeye today to make keys for
2:a Ford. 68 miles round trip. I hear we are slipping into a depression.
3:I like to fuck.
4: Rod
5:'end
6:'
7:end
Edit command:S
Saving message...
As for the message to which you replied...
[A]bort, [C]ontinue or [Z]ap:Zap
Mail from Steve Albany
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 14:45:43
[A]bort, [N]ew only, [R]ead or [S]kip:Read
Ola! Up from Tucson for the XMas thing... Will be in town until
Friday. If you shoot me yer number I'll buzz ya as soon as I can.. (Lost my
phone book)...
[A]bort, [C]ontinue, [I]nsty-reply or [Z]ap:Insty-reply
Enter a line containing only an [*] to stop
1:Hi, good to hear from you. Mr. Green sez HI! Number is 277-xxxx.
2:
3:Solstice parties are fun.
4:end
Edit command:S
Saving message...
As for the message to which you replied...
[A]bort, [C]ontinue or [Z]ap:Zap
Post Office command:JN
*=* Journey to a SIG *=*
*=* Nick's Music Palace Bulletin Board entered *=*
Nick's Music Palace Bulletin Board command:$C
Press [A] to abort
Message: 1570
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Chit-Chat & Sing
Subject: D-d-d-d-
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 03:04:27
And Dire Straits.
Anyone for Dvorak?
No, I thought not. Everyone thinks it's something to do with keyboards...
Message: 1571
Author: $ Nick Ianuzzi
Category: Chit-Chat & Sing
Subject: starts with "D"
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 04:14:29
Well, there's the Divinyls, but that's a rather touchy subject.
Nick's Music Palace Bulletin Board command:EC
You chose Chit-Chat & Sing
Subject:D
Enter a line containing only an [*] to stop
1:I don't have a Dire Straits CD but I sure like their music. The others,
2:Dvorak and Divinyls, I haven't heard before. What kind of music do they
3:play?
4:
5:The last CD I purchased was several days ago. It was the Doors, Morrison
6:Hotel. That makes my fourth Doors Album. I have everything Dylan sang but
7:I only have 1 Donovan CD. I have nothing by the Doobie Brothers.
8:
9:Tomorror let's do the E's or perhaps we should start with those that begin
10:with an A.
11:end
Edit command:S
Saving message...
The message is 1572
Nick's Music Palace Bulletin Board command:JN
*=* Journey to a SIG *=*
*=* Public Bulletin Board entered *=*
Public Bulletin Board command:$C
Press [A] to abort
Message: 80756
Author: $ Apollo SysOp
Category: Bulletins
Subject: SSN.TXT
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 02:35:31
Want to know some interesting things about your Social Security
Number and how to go about keeping it private? Read the ASCII file
SSN.TXT that can be found in the [L]ibrary. File size is 13K
This File was [U]ploaded to the system by Beauregard Dog
If you [D]ownload it in [A]SCII, you can read it on line and use the
[P]ause key at any time.
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=* <-clif-
Message: 80757
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Hic, haec, hoc...
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 03:10:34
It is "proPter hoc". I think "procter hoc" is what the Proctor drinks with
chicken and fish.
Message: 80758
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Vote
Subject: Christmas Tree vote
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 03:11:58
I want to gripe about the Christmas Tree vote. Not on the grounds of
wording, but because I gathered from the discussion that people think the
(A) and (D) choices mean you're going to kill a tree to put a real one in
your house. This isn't necessary. For the past few Christmases we've had a
live tree in a pot, and planted it outside after Christmas. These trees are
still alive and growing very well. So much for the rape of the earth.
At my mother's house in England there used to be a Christmas tree that we
planted outside about thirty years ago. It grew so enormous that finally
she *had* to have it cut down because it was smothering the entire back of
the house. They carted it down to Hemel Hempstead Town Hall on a big truck,
decorated it and put it on public display as the town Christmas tree that
year. Quite a good sendoff for an old tree.
Message: 80759
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: News Today
Subject: Gobfrey
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 03:12:37
Headline in Friday's Republic:
YELTSIN SHOWS HIS STRENGTH,
SEIZES KREMLIN
[Quite a feat. But how far did he get it off the ground?]
Message: 80760
Author: James Matlock
Category: On the Lighter Side
Subject: Aleister Crowley
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 06:20:29
This guy is hugely entertaining. There's a picture of him facing page 174
of L. Sprague de Camp's _Spirits, Stars and Spells_ ,with a sort of magical
pillow-cushion on his head, and his fists propped against his temples as
though he were suffering a migraine, that never fails to put me in good
spirits. The man is a crack-up. There's a really hilarious passage from his
_Magic (in theory and practice)_ book which inadvertently does more to
deflate silly spiritualists who take themselves seriously, than any
debunking by the _Skeptical Enquirer_ :
"One must add a word on spiritism, which is a sort of indiscriminant
necromancy -- one might prefer the word necrophilia -- by amateurs. They
make themselves perfectly passive, and, so far from employing any methods of
protection, deliberately invite all and sundry spirits, demons, shells of
the dead, all the excrement and filth of earth and hell, to squirt their
slime over them. This invitation is readily accepted, unless a clean man be
present with an aura good enough to frighten these foul denizens of the pit.
. . . Of all the creatures He [Crowley means himself] ever met, the most
prominent of English spiritists (a journalist and pacifist of more than
European fame) had the filthiest mind and the foulest mouth. He would break
off any conversation to tell a stupid smutty story, and could hardly
conceive of any society assembling for any other purpose than 'phallic
orgies', whatever they may be. Utterly incapable of keeping to a subject,
he would drag the conversation down again and again to the sole subject
of which he really thought -- sex and sex perversions and sex and sex and
sex again." (CONT.)
Message: 80762
Author: James Matlock
Category: On the Lighter Side
Subject: CONT.
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 06:38:44
"This was the plain result of his spiritism. All spiritists are more or
less similarly afflicted. They feel dirty even across the street; their
auras are ragged, muddy, and malodorous; they ooze the slime of putrefying
corpses.
No spiritist, once he is wholly enmeshed in sentimentality and Freudian
fear-phantasms, is capable of concentrated thought, of persistent will, or
of moral character. Devoid of every spark of the divine light which was his
birthright, a prey before death to the ghastly tenents of the grave, the
wretch, like the mesmerized and living corpse of Poe's Monsieur Valdemar, is
a 'nearly liquid mass of loathsome, of detestable putrescence.'
The student of this Holy Magick is most earnestly warned against frequenting
their seances, or even admitting them to his presence.
They are as contagious as syphilis, and more deadly and disgusting. Unless
your aura is strong enough to inhibit any manifestation of the loathly
larvae that have taken up their habitation in them, shun them as you need
not mere lepers!"
This of course is the most egregious hypocrisy, coming from Crowley, but
wonderfully illustrates the fact that he is not above peppering his
treatises upon the Art of "Holy Magick" with some pot shots at his
enemies. Sometimes he even singles out personal acquaintances as targets
for his bombastic, condescending, childish tirades, and the results are
usually rather humorous, especially, coming as they do, in the context of
metaphysical pronouncements of the utmost gravity.
Message: 80763
Author: James Matlock
Category: On the Lighter Side
Subject: the de Camp book
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 06:59:06
It really has some choice stuff in it:
"MacGregor Mathers called his society the Order of the Golden dawn. He
practiced the contemplation of arcane symbols and attracted such followers
as the fantasy writer Algernon Blackwood and the Irish poet William Butler
Yeats, who dabbled in occultism with tongue in cheek. One of the faithful,
an elderly clergyman, had concocted an Elixer of Life; but he boggled at
drinking it when a brother alchemist warned him that he would lose his hair
and nails in the process of becoming immortal. While he hesitated, alas,
the precious stuff dried up.
In the 1890s, Mathers and his wife moved to Paris, where they lived on
funds provided by a follower. Yeats, who visited them there, told how he
once played four-man chess with them. While Yeats' partner was Mrs.
Mathers, Mathers' partner was a ghost. Whenever it was the ghost's turn to
move, Mathers would stare at the empty chair opposite and solemnly make the
spirit's move for it.
Mathers was given to parading around the streets of Paris in Highland
garb because, as he explained, 'When I am dressed like this I feel like a
walking flame.' Yet behind these histrionics, he was so timid that he was
afraid to have an annoying polyp removed from his nose and so tender-hearted
that, when he caught mice in a trap, he kept them in a cage and fed them."
Message: 80764
Author: $ Archi Medes
Category: Politics
Subject: Bad idea
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 09:35:16
I just read your 4-page answer to my posts, and I hope you will forgive me
if I sound a little like I lost my bookmark. I've spent the last two days
correcting a problem with this modem software I didn't know I had, and I've
succeeded in getting myself thoroughly distracted. I'll try to get back on
point here.
FS> Your proposal that supposedly would get the gvt out of the currency
FS> system would inevitably drag it back in. After all, who is going to
FS> make sure all those people, banks, businesses issuing "backed" currency
FS> really have the backing?
Good point. But then, that *is* the job of gov't. I suppose I'd prefer to
see them getting involved in that than siphoning off the wealth of the
people with money that isn't backed at all.
I tend to agree with you generally on the grounds that the system I
suggested (for discussion only, I remind you) begs too many questions. The
system we have now is a known disaster and a known fraud; the system
compelled of gov't by the Constitution of the United States works and its
operation is known and its susceptibility to fraud is minimal. So, the
Constitutional monetary standard is to be preferred. It is also to be
preferred because the Constitution mandates it; any other system is illegal
until the Constitution is amended to permit it.
Message: 80765
Author: $ Archi Medes
Category: Politics
Subject: Better for whom?
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 09:36:29
FS> With a little thought, it is immediately obvious why a "valueless" in
FS> the absolute sense, currency is actually a "better" currency.
"Better" for whom? Certainly not for anyone earning their daily bread from
the exchange of their labor and skills in the marketplace. All that person
can pass on to his children is debt. A monetary system of intrinsic value,
on the other hand, permits him to improve his wages, improve his living
standard at less cost, and pass on his achievements to his children at no
cost to their living standard.
FS> And then, as you latter said, we can do pretty much what you want to do
FS> anyways, if we want to.
What I am trying to do is bring to your attention the reasons why we should
want to. Constitutional principle, for example. Individual liberty
guaranteed to us by that Constitution, which is stolen from us by the
debauchery of our currency. The violation of all our rights by virtue (?)
of our "voluntary" use of the fraudulent trappings of this monetary system,
when in reality it isn't "voluntary" at all. If it were "voluntary" I would
be paid my wages in gold or silver coin, as the law requires, and I would
have no objection if others wished to be paid in substance of no value.
Message: 80766
Author: $ Archi Medes
Category: Politics
Subject: IRS
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 09:37:57
FS> Then you launch off into an attack on the IRS. Unless your objection
FS> is simply to the paying of taxes, for whatever reason, I see no basis
FS> for your attack on the IRS as somehow messing up the system you want.
FS> All the IRS is going to do is tax you on your income.
I would be enormously happy if all the IRS did was tax me on my income.
Unfortunately, they illegally tax me on my wages, too. Wages are not
income. Wages are fair and equal exchange for labor. And since I have no
income, but only wages, I consider their illegal appropriation and forced
embezzlement of my property, which is my labor, to be theft.
Now, that which I just said is a standard under our Constitution. However,
the argument can be made that since my labor is paid for in worthless
i.o.u.'s (checks) redeemable in worthless pieces of green paper, then I have
received nothing of value in exchange for my labor. How can I be taxed on
something that is worthless? Whether the IRS has power to tax income
(profit) only, which is the case, or has the power to tax wages also, which
it fraudulently claims -- either way, I received nothing of value for my
wages last year. Therefore I earned nothing; indeed, along with everyone
else in this country, I went further into debt. By what authority, then, am
I taxed?
Message: 80767
Author: $ Archi Medes
Category: Politics
Subject: IOU's for IOU's
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 09:39:20
FS> If there is (and there is) some current way to equate income in "value"
FS> to income in FRNs then you can pay your taxes appropriately and aside
FS> from that one transaction, never have to deal with FRNs.
Your repeated inference that by dealing in checks and other trappings and
traps of this illegal economic system, that one is not thereby dealing in
frns, is ludicrous. Checks are denominated in frns. Checks are worthless
i.o.u.'s payable in worthless i.o.u.'s, and are denominated in debt.
Furthermore, by rejecting all voluntary law merchant relationships (such as
bank and credit accounts) it becomes arguable in court, should the need
arise, that one's use of frns (being the last remaining evidence of
participation in the scam) is not voluntary at all, but compelled, by virtue
of the fact that I cannot get a job which pays me as the law requires, in
gold or silver coin. I cannot get such a job because such a job is not
available under the IRS stranglehold on business.
I might add that those who have attempted to honestly rectify this
oppression by opening gold and silver exchanges outside the system have been
harassed, raided, robbed at gunpoint, and their members' savings stolen.
Gov't doesn't like people being free; it limits the tyranny gov't can
exercise (which is why we have the U.S. Constitution in the first place, and
we'd better start compelling gov't to obey it).
Message: 80768
Author: $ Archi Medes
Category: Politics
Subject: Money v. gov't
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 09:40:30
FS> Once again, your objections are stated in terms of our currency but
FS> your real objection remains that fact that the gvt isn't doing things
FS> exactly the way you think they should,not the currency being use.
Fred, why do you keep repeating that? I have agreed over and over again
that I object to what gov't is doing because what gov't is doing is illegal
and oppressive and is tyranny, purely and simply, and that what gov't is
doing with the monetary system is fraudulent, illegal, oppressive, and
tyrannical, and that if gov't would obey the Constitution my arguments would
be unnecessary, and if it obeyed the Constitution we would have an honest
monetary system, and that it debauched our honest monetary system in order
to make itself free of the Constitution and so it could be fraudulent,
illegal, oppressive, and tyrannical to its hearts' content.
I will determine what my "real objection is," and my real objection is
fraudulent, illegal, oppressive, government tyranny -- and that tyranny
starts with this fraudulent monetary system and ends when this fraudulent
monetary system ends. There may still be some tyranny under a
Constitutional monetary system, but it then can be dealt with. Under this
system justice doesn't stand a chance.
Message: 80769
Author: $ Archi Medes
Category: Politics
Subject: Dizzying naivete
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 09:41:42
FS> Why does the gvt disregard "value" in setting "value" for tax purposes?
FS> What would you have them do? Force you to sell your house in order to
FS> establish it's value??
Oh, Fred. I get the feeling that everything I say goes straight in one
eyeball and out the other. WHAT I WOULD HAVE THEM DO, FRED, IS CONDUCT
THEMSELVES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONSTITUTION AND NOT IMPOSE PROPERTY OR
INCOME TAXES, WHICH ARE DIRECT TAXES, AT ALL!
FS> I'm not sure I understand your complaint!?!?!
That's obvious. You don't understand my complaint because you think gov't
has a divine right to govern, and has a divine right to impose taxes on
whatever it decides to impose taxes on, and has a divine right to do any
darned thing it wants to do or the people democratically want it to do, in
spite of the fact that our system of gov't is *not* supposed to be a pure
democracy; it is supposed to be a Constitutional Republic where neither
gov't nor the majority of citizens have the authority or power to infringe
upon the rights of the individual. You think anyone who objects to gov't
tyranny is just a malcontent who wants everything his way regardless of
principle. You are wrong.
Message: 80770
Author: $ Archi Medes
Category: Politics
Subject: Fairness 1/2
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 09:42:40
FS> Fairness requires that everyone be taxed on the same basis and the only
FS> basis that really is possible to apply to everyone is "current" value.
Right. Leave it to someone who has sold his inherited and unalienable
rights and Constitutionally-guaranteed liberties to the god of wealth to
expound on what constitutes "fairness." I don't want your definition of
"fairness," Fred; I want my inherited and unalienable rights, and I want
everyone else to have their inherited and unalienable rights. I even want
*you* to have your inherited and unalienable rights, Fred, though obviously
they are meaningless and of no value to you.
"Fairness" is what gets adjudicated in an equity court. "Fairness" *is*
"equity." And "fairness" means I and every other productive wage-earner in
this country, and our families, and our descendants, are *forced* at the
point of a very big gun to "voluntarily" give up our *inherited* and
*unalienable* *right* to the fruits of our labor in order to support a huge
batch of good-for-nothing layabouts (and a few worthy genuinely needy souls)
while the puppet gov't gets huge salaries for raking the bankster's
percentage off the top and putting us and all our descendents further and
further in debt.
I don't want some greedy politician or bankster's idea of "fairness" rammed
down my throat, Fred. The only one to benefit from that kind of fairness
Message: 80771
Author: $ Archi Medes
Category: Politics
Subject: Fairness 2/2
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 09:43:27
is the politician and the bankster. I want my property lawfully due me and
I want my rights. I want my country's Constitution restored to a place of
respect and honor over government. I don't want "equity;" I want *law.* I
have dedicated my life, my fortune (such as it is) and my sacred honor to
meeting that challenge. Maybe that sounds corny to you given your lack of
respect for anything but "wealth," but it wasn't corny to the founding
fathers and it isn't corny to me.
I'm sure you believe you know what "wealth" is: to you, "wealth" is land,
buildings, real estate, raw materials, and so you are told by gov't schools
and your bankster idols. But you really ought to give a moment's
consideration to what banksters consider is *their* "wealth": *Their*
"wealth" is their ownership and control of people like you.
Message: 80772
Author: $ Archi Medes
Category: Politics
Subject: Gov't affidavit...
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 09:45:35
FS> The only part of what you suggest touches on the truth is that the gvt
FS> requires an affidavit of value form be filed for property tax purposes.
(Sigh.) I rest my case, Fred. If *that* part of what I say touches on the
truth, then the whole point of my argument is true! Were it not for the
illegal monetary standard, which results in illegal and unConstitutional
taxes on property, which cannot be assessed against property owned at law,
the gov't would have no damned business sticking its nose into private
financial transactions, and any gov't dork that tried it would probably be
met with a bazooka.
So help me, Fred; any minute I expect you to come out with a comment like
"Well, then, let them eat cake!" Your unconscious elitism is astounding.
Message: 80773
Author: $ Archi Medes
Category: Politics
Subject: frns...?
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 09:46:24
FS> In regard to rental agreements, I think most use FRNs for the
FS> denomination but they don't have to as far as I know.
C'mon, Fred. I seriously doubt any rental agreement specifies payment in
"frns." And they do have to specify something in some way; otherwise
tenants could pay in cow patties. What do they specify? Sure you have some
rental agreements laying around; take a look.
Message: 80774
Author: $ Archi Medes
Category: Politics
Subject: Tax cheating!!??
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 09:48:38
FS> It is my guess (I am not a lawyer and don't give advise) that in that
FS> situation the only thing that would show up on the Tax returns would be
FS> the FRN amounts. The "labor" amounts would not show up on either the
FS> APt owners forms or the tenants forms.
Oh! Cheating on taxes, my goodness! Tsk, tsk.
Don't ya just love it? People love the fraudulent system we have so much
they defraud it every chance they get. And when they get caught they get
slam-dunked because they didn't stand up for principle; they stooped to the
almighty buck. And meanwhile they object to doing something about the
fraudulent system in the first place so they wouldn't have to 'cheat' in
order to survive or prosper.
Must be they'd rather be cheats.
Message: 80775
Author: $ Archi Medes
Category: Politics
Subject: Confiscation
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 09:50:07
FS> RE: ownership of gold, etc==> You've gone off the deep end. I realize
FS> that you view "ownership" of most things as a fiction due to the
FS> possiblity of it being sold for taxes, particularly real property.
On the contrary, when I spoke of that ownership issue, I wasn't even
thinking of the possibility of it being sold for taxes, though what I said
applies there too. I was thinking of the gov't robbery of individuals who
are traveling with "too much" money and are unwilling to waive their privacy
by attempting to justify it to someone who has no business knowing about it
and has no business even stopping someone for interrogation in the absence
of probable cause of a crime having been committed.
Nonetheless, it is true. Under a worthless monetary standard, all rights
are fiction, not merely the right of ownership, because under a worthless
monetary standard all courts are equity courts, and rights have no standing
in equity courts.
Meanwhile you can think I've gone off the deep end if you want to, but keep
it in mind if you should decide to do something with more than 3,000 frns in
cash without letting your IRS surveillance officers know about it and
getting their permission in advance. You'll learn a lesson in reality.
(You might anyway; they get a kick out lying to suckers and then
slam-dunking them.)
Message: 80776
Author: $ Archi Medes
Category: Politics
Subject: TEFRA
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 09:51:16
FS> As to owning gold, I'm completely lost on that as I see no restriction
FS> at all on people owning all the gold they want. In fact, there is less
FS> restriction since it isn't even subject to continuing tax the way
FS> property is so you can accumulate all you want with out fear of having
FS> to sell it to pay the taxes.
Oh? Obviously you haven't bought or sold any gold recently -- since the
middle of Reagan's term, anyway -- at a gov't approved gold dealer. If you
had, you would have learned about TEFRA -- Tax Enforcement Financial
Reporting Act -- which requires a financial transaction form for the IRS,
the same as if you want to withdraw your own money from a bank, or put your
own money *in* a bank, or even just exchange your own money for a cashier's
check or money order.
Rest assured, if you refuse to complete the form, the IRS has the option of
taxing your gold at the rate of 100% -- i.e., confiscating it. And you have
no recourse, even if you later prove that you came by the frns or the gold
legitimately. Wake up and read the newspapers, Fred. They're doing this
crap all over the country, and they are doing it now, in the guise of the
so-called "drug war," which is not a drug war but is a war against *liberty*
and *rights.*
Message: 80777
Author: $ Archi Medes
Category: Politics
Subject: Trading wheat
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 09:52:12
FS> As to not being able to transfer ownership of gold becuase you have to
FS> use FRNs - that's nonsense. Nothing compells you to use FRNs to buy
FS> gold.
Oh? What other substance is available to me with which to buy gold? I
can't get a job where I am paid in real money (gold) or any other substance
of intrinsic value, though it is my right and I would dearly like to
exercise that right.
FS> Raise wheat and trade if for gold if you want.
If I can't acquire actual ownership of gold because frns have no intrinsic
value, then I can't acquire actual ownership of land for the same reason.
Therefore I cannot acquire actual ownership of wheat grown on that land.
Therefore I cannot acquire actual ownership of gold by trading wheat.
FS> I suspect your real objection is that the sale may be subject to a tax.
No, my real objection is that I cannot acquire superior right, title, and
interest in property, because I cannot exchange my labor for substance of
value. I have no problem with *legal* and *Constitutional* taxes. I do,
however, protest *illegal* taxes. (I guess that makes me an 'illegal tax
protestor,' doesn't it?)
Message: 80778
Author: $ Archi Medes
Category: Politics
Subject: Scuttle taxes
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 09:53:23
FS> You simply are looking for any and all excuses to try and scuttle the
FS> tax system.
I sure don't have to look very hard; reasons abound to scuttle the tax
system -- the main ones being that it is illegal, it is unConstitutional, it
is oppressive, and it supports the even greater fraud of the monetary system
backed by worthless paper, in which our labor can no longer be exchanged for
wealth. Instead, we are forced to exchange our labor for debt.
FS> Since the (tax) system treats us all the same ...
The hell it does! Are you seriously suggesting that the tax system treats
people like you the same as it treats people like me? I wish it did treat
us all the same and in a Constitutional manner, i.e., no one in this nation,
regardless of wealth or status, is required to suffer a Direct Tax unless
apportioned according to the census or enumeration. Period!
FS> it seems to me you are just looking for some way to pay less tax on the
FS> same transaction as others because you DON"T use FRNs and others DO.
So? If others want to make themselves subject to a tax on their labor by
voluntarily accepting worthless paper and debt in exchange for their labor,
Message: 80779
Author: $ Archi Medes
Category: Politics
Subject: Zippety-do-DAH
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 09:54:37
let them. I choose to exchange my labor for Constitutional substance of
intrinsic value and thereby acquire wealth instead of debt. Of course, I am
thwarted in that choice, which is a violation of my inherited and
unalienable rights -- and of yours, though you reject the concept of
inherited and unalienable rights.
FS> You want to pretend you are dealing in 1901 value when others are at
FS> 1991 value.
Considering the fact that 1901 value was measured in gold dollars, and 1991
value is measured in zippety-do-dah, I'm surprised you don't join me in that
effort. I thought you *liked* real wealth. I would expect you to seek
completely superior right, title, and interest in real wealth, instead of
letting gov't keep you on as a manager only so long as you're a good little
boy and pay the protection money.
Message: 80780
Author: $ Felix Cat
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Merry Christmas
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 17:15:47
Merry Christmas to one and all!!!
Message: 80781
Author: $ Rod Williams
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Merry Christmas
Date: 12/23/91 Time: 18:04:18
and a Happy Depression.