The Corporate Lie

Discussion in 'US Taxes' started by Lex Quadruplator, Nov 11, 2008.

  1. The Corporate Lie

    Exposed is the intentional fraud instigated and maintained by the
    legal industry on millions of unsuspecting victims. Exposed is the
    dolus malus, deceit, dishonesty and fraudulent inducement hidden under
    the rule that the legal industry cannot relinquish or reveal their
    course of dealing and usage of trade to the public at large. Exposed
    is a legal system that has brought us fascist governments, police
    states, private banking cartels, income taxes, lost of rights,
    discontent, degradation and unending wars, a legal system that has
    served tyrants since its inception and continues to do so today.

    www.lexquadruplator.org
     
    Lex Quadruplator, Nov 11, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Lex Quadruplator

    AllYou! Guest

    In
    I'm always fascinated about the hypocrisy of those who believe that
    they know what most of the rest of us do not, and so decide that
    they will save us from the evils they've discovered. What's
    fascinating about it is how they are usually the ones who believe
    the rest of us to be sheep upon whom *they*an prey. Examples:

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    "Welcome my friends to what will now be the most important writing
    you will have read in your life."
    Not only am I not your friend, but you have no way of knowing if
    your pontifications are the most important thing I've ever read.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    "To start, how many of you understand or are even aware of, that all
    states and all governments are corporations? "
    What makes you think this is such a revelation? I've noticed that
    ever since I was old enough to read a town or city limit sign. I
    was also able to figure out that there are all sorts of
    corporations, and so the fact that two entities are each
    corporations doesn't necessarily mean that they have anything else
    in common.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    "'The United States was never a corporation...' - Stephen Jenuth
    'Assuming Canada is a corporation, which is not admitted by me...' -
    Stephen Jenuth
    This my friends is indicative and is testimony to just how corrupt
    the legal systems are."

    Two comments in Usenet by one individual is "testimony" to the
    corruption of the entire legal system?
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    But now we come to the classic mistake made by most of these
    nitwits. They believe that because something is a product of the
    intellect (of which they have very little), that it therefore does
    not exist. That's it's all therefore fictitious. Amazingly,
    however, they still rely on things like "ownership", and "property",
    and "rights", and "morals", and "character", and "fairness", and
    "legal", and all sorts of other concepts, all of which are also
    nothing more than inventions of the intellect. None of those exist
    except in the human mind.

    Does that make any of them less real than a rock, or a tree? Are
    all of these just "fictitious" too? Of course not. In fact, these
    nut jobs rely on those "fictions" and "stories" to make their case
    that "government" is "fictitious", and "corrupt". Amazingly, even
    the concept of "corruption" is an invention of the human mind, but
    that doesn't stop them from using it as though it were something
    tangible and real.

    And that's because intellectual entities are what they are, and they
    are what we make of them, and if a government is just a fiction,
    then corruption is just as fictitious, and so is love, and peace,
    and fairness, and rights, and right, and everything else that they,
    themselves, believe to be so precious.

    It's all nothing but of bunch of word games, and misdirection.
     
    AllYou!, Nov 11, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements


  3. The Corporate Lie

    Ah yes, the corporate lie. A lie to hide the fact that the legal
    industry is maintaining corporate taxslave plantations ruled and
    regulated by the dictatorial enslaving roman law of persons all
    financed by a den of vipers. Where a man is unlawfully "incorporated"
    into roman style corporate entities and the only rights to be had are
    those associated to a rank held. Unknowingly accepting the "legal
    identity" as his own, he is held liable for the performance of his
    "person" as is dictated by the dictatorial roman law; the commands of
    a fictitious entity - a person shall, a person shall not. Out the
    window are his unalienable rights and his sovereignty in exchange for
    an unjust system of fraud and oppression.

    www.lexquadruplator.org
     
    Lex Quadruplator, Nov 11, 2008
    #3
  4. Lex Quadruplator

    Abbot Guest

    Abbot) AllYou, Lex doesn’t seem to realize that the Russell Dale
    Mortland case wrecks his argument too.

    After a ton of verbiage Lex will eventually get around to telling us
    that governments, legislatures, laws, inalienable rights and courts
    aren’t real.

    The poor boy just doesn’t realize that he can’t square his whacky
    theory with the reality that Mortland’s right to privacy and freedom
    from unreasonable search was protected by the U.S. federal court’s
    recognition of the 5th amendment to the Constitution.

    Sounds pretty real to me.
     
    Abbot, Nov 11, 2008
    #4
  5. Lex Quadruplator

    AllYou! Guest

    In
    If the government is fictitious because it's a corporation, and a
    corporation is just a construct of the intellect, then so is the
    law, and so then so is the legal industry. How can you have so many
    problems with things of fiction?

    No one can be ruled who is in a circumstance from which they can
    voluntarily withdraw.
    By your own standards, law is a fiction, and so it doesn't exist,
    and so nothing can be unlawful.
    By your own standards, rights are a fiction, and so they do not
    exist either.
     
    AllYou!, Nov 11, 2008
    #5
  6. Lex Quadruplator

    gerry Guest

    As I see it, incorporated bodies in and of themselves, is not the
    problem.

    The problem is how they are being used by the evil people who immerce
    themselves in the veil of the corporate body to deprive their fellow
    man
    of his/her life - the deprivation of the fruits of their labour and
    the
    deprivation of the unalienable rights of life, liberty, property and
    due
    process of law, such as were stated in sections 20 and 39 of the
    original Magna Carta.

    The party posting as AllYou are demonstrating the evil methods of
    'word smithing' while accusing others of doing the same.

    And, Jack Foster. You spew:
    How many US Court cases need be cited where the the judge tells
    the defendant that 'You are not party to the Constitution', and thus
    tell the defendant that claiming Constitutional Rights amounts to
    contempt of court.

    Now, would this be because the defendant, who has identified himself
    as a 'legal identity name' owned by the State or Crown as a slave,
    is not a corporate signatory to that corporate document? Or is it
    because,
    as an accused disobedient slave, the defendant has been stripped of
    the rights of due process of law under the Roman doctrine of homo
    sacer,
    and thus, no claim of right from any source will be acknowledged by
    the court?

    And, Jack, your insistant spewing about the Russell Dale Mortland
    case as being a failure of Eldon's methods, it is obvious, if the man
    called Russel Dale of the Mortland family is/was known and identified
    to the court as the 'legal identity' Russell Dale Mortland, then he
    wasn't
    following any methods taught by Eldon Warman in his detax program.

    Vicegerent
     
    gerry, Nov 11, 2008
    #6
  7. Lex Quadruplator

    Abbot Guest

    Abbot) Wrong question, old man. You should be asking about the times
    the protections of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights (which you
    call fictions) saved someone's very real liberty.
    Abbot) You devious snake. I didn't say your method failed. I said you
    lie about Mortland using it!

    See the link: http://groups.google.com/group/can.taxes/browse_thread/thread/2d1a29bd2d1d10dc?hl=en#

    YOU said he used your method and even posted his MP3 file from Common
    Law Venue on your website to make it seem he used your method! Now
    that it turns out you lied, you pretend you don't know anything about
    Mortland!
     
    Abbot, Nov 11, 2008
    #7
  8. Lex Quadruplator

    AllYou! Guest

    In
    And yet, unlike you, I fully supported my assertions with logical
    arguments to exact quotes. If you were as fair in your assertions
    and accusations, you'd provide a quote by where you believe this to
    be true, and then you'd make an argument for why you believe it to
    be true.

    Instead, you blather on and on about all of the evils that someone
    or other is perpetrating in all of the unsuspecting masses, but
    other than hyperbole, you've got nothing.
     
    AllYou!, Nov 12, 2008
    #8
  9. Lex Quadruplator

    Abbot Guest

    Abbot) All of Warman’s theories are borrowed from some other detaxer
    or anti-government pseudo scholar. He doesn’t even understand them
    himself. That and the dysfunction associated with his schizophrenia
    are why he can’t defend his own theories, but can only repeat them.
    Every time he gets nailed on a point (see his recent bashing about his
    false claims of success in the Mortland case) he changes the subject
    and starts to rant.

    Eldon seems unable to grasp the supremacy of the constitutional law in
    western democracies and instead palavers on about the Pope owning
    North America, etc. etc.. . .

    It has had no effect on the old boy’s thinking that he has, not once
    in the last 24 years, had a single detax success and that many of the
    “methods” he has borrowed were proven failures long before he
    plagiarized them.
     
    Abbot, Nov 12, 2008
    #9
  10. Lex Quadruplator

    AllYou! Guest

    In
    I've never understood how some people can buy into their crap so
    completely. They think it's a huge revelation that something like a
    corporation isn't tangible, and so they proceed to call it
    fictitious. They simply have no understanding that 'intangible' and
    'fictitious' are no where near the same thing.

    Here is a limited list of things that are fictitious IF viewed by
    THEIR standards:

    Rights
    Right
    Law
    Unlawful
    Commitments
    Promises
    Freedom
    To rule
    To be ruled
    Ownership
    Home
    Family
    Love
    Murder
    Oppression
    Subjugation
    Slavery
    Cooperation
    Association
    Alliance
    Collaboration
    Argument

    and last, but not least, Complaint

    None of these are "tangible", and yet, the effects of that which
    they define is just as real, and just as tangible as 'governments',
    'corporations', and everything else that they claim is not real.
    And that's where their "argument" collapses of its own weight. If
    governments and corporations are fictitious, then so is slavery, and
    oppression, and all of the other things they complain about.

    In the end, either they are "complaining" about things which are no
    more real than the Boogie Men under their beds, or they have no real
    "complaints" at all, except that they cannot get something for
    nothing.
     
    AllYou!, Nov 12, 2008
    #10
  11. Lex Quadruplator

    Abbot Guest

    Abbot) It’s really quite simple. Detaxers of this ilk do not recognize
    any authority and rationalize doing so by saying the cops, the courts,
    the legislature the government and even the law itself is a
    nonexistent fiction. No matter how fair and just their government
    might be, any over zealous cop, politician on the take, or clueless
    judge only serves to reinforce their belief that ALL government is
    evil. Indeed, in another thread you can see Warman using the taser
    death of an immigrant at the Vancouver airport as an excuse for his
    “The Pope Rules the World” theory.

    Trying to point out to them the illogical bend of their argument is a
    nonstarter since it would require that these detaxers recognize what
    is wrong with them, not what’s wrong about the government.

    The denial is doubly strong with detaxers like Eldon and StaR (Lex)
    since a “reality intervention” in their case would include confronting
    the reality that they have wasted their lives and ruined several
    families with their insane detax babble.
     
    Abbot, Nov 12, 2008
    #11
  12. Lex Quadruplator

    AllYou! Guest

    In
     
    AllYou!, Nov 12, 2008
    #12
  13. The Corporate Lie


    Ah yes, the corporate lie. A lie to hide the fact that the legal
    industry is maintaining corporate taxslave plantations ruled and
    regulated by the dictatorial enslaving roman law of persons all
    financed by a den of vipers. Where a man is unlawfully "incorporated"
    into roman style corporate entities and the only rights to be had are
    those associated to a rank held. Unknowingly accepting the "legal
    identity" as his own, he is held liable for the performance of his
    "person" as is dictated by the dictatorial roman law; the commands of
    a fictitious entity - a person shall, a person shall not. Out the
    window are his unalienable rights and his sovereignty in exchange for
    an unjust system of fraud and oppression.

    www.lexquadruplator.org
     
    Lex Quadruplator, Nov 13, 2008
    #13
  14. Lex Quadruplator

    AllYou! Guest

    In
    Then you should be able to explain how it is that anyone can ever be
    enslaved when they are in circumstances from which they can
    voluntarily withdraw. But you can't, now can you.

    If, by your reasoning, a corporation fictitious because it is an
    invention of the mind, then by that same reasoning, the law is also
    fictitious. So how, then, can any action be unlawful?
    If, by your reasoning, a corporation fictitious because it is an
    invention of the mind, then by that same reasoning, the 'rights' are
    also fictitious. So how, then, can you have any concern about
    rights?
    Acceptance is an invention of the mind too.
    Possession is an invention of the mind too.
    Liability is an invention of the mind too.
    Unalienable rights are an invention of the mind too, and so they are
    just as fictitious as a corporation, aren't they?
    Sovereignty is an invention of the mind too.
    Justice, and Systems, and Fraud, and Oppression are all just
    inventions of the mind too, and so they are just as fictitious as a
    corporation, aren't they?

    Or is it your position that only what's important to you is real,
    and anything that stands in your way of getting something for
    nothing is fictitious?
     
    AllYou!, Nov 13, 2008
    #14

  15. Bwahahahahaha too funny!!


    ----------
    37th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

    Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights

    Tuesday, May 28, 2002

    Professor Patrick Healy, professor of law at McGill University

    "Well, your question goes directly to the heart of the issue. A
    corporation is a fiction, by definition, and any attempt to construct
    a model of criminal liability for a fiction will involve further
    fictions. The question you ask is, where is the limit of the just
    imposition of responsibility on these fictitious entities?.."
    ----------
    AMENDMENTS TO THE CRIMINAL CODE

    C-45 CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF ORGANIZATIONS

    PROBLEM

    A corporation is a "fiction" as it has no separate existence, no
    physical body and no "mind".
    ----------



    Readers!!! Make no mistake my friends, corporations are FICTIONS, mere
    FICTITIOUS ENTITIES.

    Come see what these two ranting fools are trying to hide from you!!!

    The Corporate Lie
    www.lexquadruplator.org
     
    Lex Quadruplator, Nov 13, 2008
    #15
  16. Lex Quadruplator

    AllYou! Guest

    In
    But what you refuse to address is how the same logic you employed in
    coming to the conclusion that a corporation is fictitious can't then
    also be applied to conclude that rights, and ownership, and slavery,
    and rule are not also fictitious. Your logic either works, or it
    does not.
     
    AllYou!, Nov 13, 2008
    #16
  17. ----------
    37th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

    Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights

    Tuesday, May 28, 2002

    Professor Patrick Healy, professor of law at McGill University

    "Well, your question goes directly to the heart of the issue. A
    corporation is a fiction, by definition, and any attempt to construct
    a model of criminal liability for a fiction will involve further
    fictions. The question you ask is, where is the limit of the just
    imposition of responsibility on these fictitious entities?.."
    ----------
    AMENDMENTS TO THE CRIMINAL CODE

    C-45 CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF ORGANIZATIONS

    PROBLEM

    A corporation is a "fiction" as it has no separate existence, no
    physical body and no "mind".
    ----------



    Readers!!! Make no mistake my friends, corporations are FICTIONS, mere
    FICTITIOUS ENTITIES.

    Come see what these two ranting fools are trying to hide from you!!!

    The Corporate Lie
    www.lexquadruplator.org
     
    Lex Quadruplator, Nov 13, 2008
    #17
  18. Lex Quadruplator

    Abbot Guest

    Abbot) StaR/Lex makes his argument by employing the logical fallacy of
    the undistributed middle (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/undismid.html)
    to make it seem that the references to “legal fictions” and "fictions"
    he has found in obiter dictum have the same meaning as a the
    deliberate deceptions found in the legal use of the word “fictitious”.

    Since the words “fictions” and “fictitious” sound alike a share some
    usages StaR assumes they have the same meaning in all contexts.

    Not so.

    Black's Law tell us that "fictitious" means: Founded in fiction;
    having the character of a fiction; pretend; counterfeited. Feigned,
    imaginary, not real, false, not genuine, nonexistent. Arbitrarily
    invented and set up to accomplish an ulterior object.

    But a "legal fiction" is a supposition of fact taken to be true by the
    courts of law, but which are not necessarily true. They typically are
    used to evade archaic rules of procedure or to extend the jurisdiction
    of the courts in ways that were considered useful, but not strictly
    authorized by the old rule.

    They are two different terms with two different meanings!

    Consequently StaR tells us that democratic governments are gathered
    together by the people (a point nobody argues), and using his logical
    fallacy wrongly concludes, in turn, that governments are “made up”,
    thus a “fiction” and thus are “fictitious deceptions”. . .and thus are
    “unreal” and “nonexistent”.

    Thus to StaR the real becomes unreal.

    You will note that StaR doesn’t quote any court decisions that say
    governments are "non-existent". That’s because no court has ever
    followed is twisted logic.

    StaR’s been busted in his use of the undistributed middle so many
    times that he should know better.
     
    Abbot, Nov 13, 2008
    #18
  19. Lex Quadruplator

    AllYou! Guest

    In
    Neither do rights, but you believe that those are real, don't you?
    Neither does ownership, but you believe that to be real as well.
    Why is that?
     
    AllYou!, Nov 13, 2008
    #19

  20. Poor AllYou, having been duped by his mentor Abbot the Retard for so
    long, he is left with no choice but to parade his stupidity for all to
    see. LMFAO


    First, his mentor, Abbot the Retard, denied (lied) that a state was a
    corporation of ANY SORT...


    ----------
    "Nor do they form a corporation... they form a nation." - Quantrell
    (aka Abbot the Retard)

    "Hence I repeat we, the people, form a nation, not a corporation..." -
    Quantrell (aka Abbot the Retard)

    "The fact is Canada is not a corporation and you have never proven
    that it is, except to give us interpretations of cases you can't
    understand, and don't site properly." - Raider (aka Abbot the Retard)

    "The Union of States was created by the U.S. Constitution and is not a
    corporation." - Raider (aka Abbot the Retard)

    "One need only to read the preamble to the Constitution to see that
    the Framers were not creating either a public or private corporation.
    They were creating "a more prefect union"." - Quantrell (aka Abbot the
    Retard)
    ----------




    Of course we know this to be a complete LIE...



    ----------
    U.S. Supreme Court
    PROPRIETORS OF CHARLES RIVER BRIDGE v. PROPRIETORS OF, 36 U.S. 420
    (1837)

    "Corporations are also of all grades, and made for varied objects; all
    governments are corporations, created by usage and common consent, or
    grants and charters which create a body politic for prescribed
    purposes; but whether they are private, local or general, in their
    objects, for the enjoyment of property, or the exercise of power, they
    are all governed by the same rules of law, as to the construction and
    the obligation of the instrument by which the incorporation is made."

    "The federal government itself is but a corporation, created by the
    grant or charter of the separate states;"
    ----------
    A LAW DICTIONARY

    ADAPTED TO THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
    AND OF THE SEVERAL STATES OF THE AMERICAN UNION

    by John Bouvier

    CORPORATIONS

    5. The United States of America are a corporation endowed with the
    capacity to sue and be sued, to convey and receive property. 1 Marsh.
    Dec. 177, 181. But it is proper to observe that no suit can be brought
    against the United States without authority of law.

    6. Nations or states, are denominated by publicists, bodies politic,
    and are said to have their affairs and interests, and to deliberate
    and resolve, in common. They thus become as moral persons, having an
    understanding and will peculiar to themselves, and are susceptible of
    obligations and laws. Vattel, 49. In this extensive sense the United
    States may be termed a corporation; and so may each state singly. Per
    Iredell, J. 3 Dall. 447.
    ----------
    U.S. Supreme Court
    CHISHOLM v. STATE OF GA., 2 U.S. 419 (1793)

    "The only law concerning corporations, to which I conceive the least
    reference is to be had, is the common law of England on that subject.
    I need not repeat the observations I made in respect to the operation
    of that law in this country. The word 'corporations,' in its largest
    sense, has a more extensive meaning than people generally are aware
    of. Any body politic (sole or aggregate) whether its power be
    restricted or transcendant, is in this sense 'a corporation.' The
    King, accordingly, in England is called a corporation. 10 Co. 29. b.
    So also, by a very respectable author (Sheppard, in his abridgement,
    1Vol. 431.) is the Parliament itself. In this extensive sense, not
    only each State singly, but even the United States may without
    impropriety be termed "corporations."

    "As to corporations, all States whatever are corporations or bodies
    politic. The only question is, what are their powers? As to individual
    States and the United States, the Constitution marks the boundary of
    powers.""
    ----------



    It is without question that a "government/state" is a CORPORATION
    created by its instrument of incorporation (charter) called a
    "constitution". But of course Allyou the Dupe says nothing of his
    mentor's lies and blindly follows Abbot the Retard with more of his
    lies.


    "...the references to “legal fictions” and "fictions"..." - Abbot the
    Retard


    LMAO. Who said anything about "legal fictions"??? Certainly not I!!!
    lol But of course, Allyou the Dupe is "duped" once again by his mentor
    Abbot the Retard and follows along.


    Readers, what we are talking about is FICTION, that is, that which is
    INVENTED OR IMAGINED by the mere FICTION OF THE MIND.


    ----------
    Webster's 1828 Dictionary

    fiction

    FIC'TION, n. [L. fictio, from fingo, to feign.]

    1. The act of feigning, inventing or imagining; as, by the mere
    fiction of the mind.

    2. That which is feigned, invented or imagined. The story is a
    fiction.

    So also was the fiction of those golden apples kept by a dragon,
    taken from the serpent which tempted Eve.
    ----------




    And what is the FICTION that we are talking about? What is INVENTED OR
    IMAGINED by the mere FICTION OF THE MIND?


    The "SEPARATE ENTITY" created by incorporation that is said to having
    "its own rights, privileges, and liabilities" (a person).


    ----------
    The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth
    Edition

    cor-po-ra-tion

    1. A body that is granted a charter recognizing it as a separate legal
    entity having its own rights, privileges, and liabilities distinct
    from those of its members.

    2. Such a body created for purposes of government. Also called body
    corporate.

    3. A group of people combined into or acting as one body.
    ----------




    It is the "entity/being" created that is the FICTION. It is the
    "entity/being" created that is INVENTED OR IMAGINED by the mere
    FICTION OF THE MIND. There is NO SEPARATE EXISTENCE!! It's all MAKE-
    BELIEVE, story telling at its very best. The "entity/being" DOES NOT
    REALLY EXIST!!! lol




    ----------
    AMENDMENTS TO THE CRIMINAL CODE

    C-45 CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF ORGANIZATIONS

    PROBLEM

    A corporation is a "fiction" as it has no separate existence, no
    physical body and no "mind".
    ----------
    37th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

    Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights

    Tuesday, May 28, 2002

    Professor Patrick Healy, professor of law at McGill University

    " Well, your question goes directly to the heart of the issue. A
    corporation is a fiction, by definition, and any attempt to construct
    a model of criminal liability for a fiction will involve further
    fictions. The question you ask is, where is the limit of the just
    imposition of responsibility on these fictitious entities?.."
    ----------
    Lennard's Carrying Co Ltd v Asiatic Petroleum Co Ltd 1915 AC 705

    "a corporation is an abstraction. -It has no mind of its own any more
    than it has a body of its own;..."
    ----------
    Michigan Law Review, vol. 79 (January 1981), p. 386

    "Did you ever expect a corporation to have a conscience, when it has
    no soul to be damned, and no body to be kicked?"
    ----------
    The Case of Sutton's Hospital, Coke Report 1a, 77 Eng. Rep. 937
    (Exchequer Chamber, 1613)

    "They [corporations] cannot commit treason, nor be outlawed nor
    excommunicate, for they have no souls."
    ----------



    Indeed it is the "entity/being" created that is a FICTITIOUS ENTITY
    described as "an artificial being, invisible, intangible, and existing
    only in contemplation of law. Being the mere creature of law,"




    ----------
    A LAW DICTIONARY

    ADAPTED TO THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
    AND OF THE SEVERAL STATES OF THE AMERICAN UNION

    by John Bouvier

    CORPORATIONS

    Chief Justice Marshall describes a corporation to be "an artificial
    being, invisible, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of
    law. Being the mere creature of law," continues the judge, "it
    possesses only those properties which the charter of its creation
    confers upon it, either expressly or as incidental to its very
    existence. These are such as are supposed best calculated to effect
    the object for which it was created. Among the most important are
    immortality, and if the expression may be allowed, individuality
    properties by which a perpetual succession of many persons are
    considered, as the same, and may act as the single individual, They
    enable a corporation to manage its own affairs, and to hold property
    without the perplexing intricacies, the hazardous and endless
    necessityof perpetual conveyance for the purpose of transmitting it
    from hand to hand. It is chiefly for the purpose of clothing bodies of
    men, in succession, with these qualities and capacities, that
    corporations were invented, and are in use."
    ----------



    "A corporation is a fiction, by definition.." - Professor Patrick
    Healy, professor of law at McGill University

    Poor AllYou, so messed up by his mentor that he can't even grasp the
    basics of things.


    Readers!!!! Come see what these two ranting fools are trying to hide
    from you!!!

    The Corporate Lie
    www.lexquadruplator.org
     
    Lex Quadruplator, Nov 14, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.